Queen of /classical/ editionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuZeX8ec81M&list=PLyrS5_ErY3KRN_KIjSFdpcYYb_j49qSw5&index=10&pp=iAQB8AUB>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: >>122753967
>>122776564porn addiction edition
>coomer editioni like buniatishvilli more
>>122776577porn addiction is based
let's try <---
>>122767204Thanks again by the way, I listened to the 4th earlier and it was excellent, stellar sound quality too. Any chance I could trouble you to upload 6-9 from that cycle?
>>122777155Did you download all the parts? Use 7zip to extract them all together. It's the complete cycle in that post. Catbox just had a 1gb limit so I had to split it into 3 files
>>122777087time to fuck off back to >>>/gif/
>>122777177Oh hmm, it only extracted the 1, 2, 4, 5. I must've only extracted the first part, I'll try again and fiddle with it, thanks. And yeah I figured that must be the case given the folder name and you mentioning the rest lol, so I suppose this was my way of asking
>>122777265Might have to rename all the files so they're the sameLike, Mahler.001, Mahler.002, Mahler.003
>>122777177>>122777265Yeah I can only get the first one to extract. Granted I haven't used 7zip or anything since I had a digital collection like 5 years ago so I'm probably missing something lol.>>122777297Okay, I'll try that, thanks.
>>122777297>>122777305That worked, much appreciated! Think I should just skip ahead to trying out that cycle or is this Chailly / Concertgebouw one worth listening to first?
>>122777325I think the difference in interpretation between the two cycles are large enough to warrant listening to both. My personal preference is towards the Gewandhaus cycle, mostly for the faster tempi, but I've kept the Concertgebouw cycle around in my library for the performances of 3, 6, and 9.
>>122777397Ah, alright. To be honest, I was not enjoying >>122777090 very much lol, so I switched to pic.>mostly for the faster tempiYeah, 26:06 on the Gewandhaus 9 Andante vs. 30:33 for the Concertgebouw, Christ. I prefer faster as well, and this one is already sounding much better to me, or at least more in line with my preferences. Excited to listen through the entire cycle!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCmLZyVya7g
now playingstart of Manfred Symphony, Op. 58:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1MAyUAVw-w&list=OLAK5uy_nDMRAjrCkCyUCxHGPrMLuBeu33aXMcE1o&index=29https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_nDMRAjrCkCyUCxHGPrMLuBeu33aXMcE1o
Voluptuous Chinese concert pianists are made for BWC
>>122778260What do you like about Muti?
>>122778260Jesus Christ this melody from the second movement, one of the most beautiful in all of music, surely:https://youtu.be/yLD6CaY3xOA?si=YYwbKkF2PN-fzFKe&t=155>>122778441Like what about his Tchaikovsky recordings? Colorful, rich, passionate, lyrical, as opposed to, say, too classical and thus stale (eg Abbado) or overly dramatic and thus stulted and forced.I'm not quite sure if I'd put his cycle over Ormandy's or Petrenko's yet, and there's probably certain individual Tchaikovsky recordings at least just as good if not slight better (Munch) with perhaps better sound quality (Solti, Dutoit), but as a complete cycle, and as someone who currently likes to try out unfamiliar recordings over re-listening to ones I like or my favorites (something I should do more often, really), I'm just liking his right now. Maybe I'll move on in a week to others or back to better ones, but at this moment, it's very enjoyable.
now playingstart of Piano Quartet No. 1 in C Minor, Op. 15:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKyAWEuDvJs&list=OLAK5uy_k-s_3dCdGAhK-b2eL8CC2jJ6Vd9As_VAI&index=7https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_k-s_3dCdGAhK-b2eL8CC2jJ6Vd9As_VAI
>>122778743why is the second track in japanese? lol
>>122778772lol no idea why that happens, I noticed it every so often on singular tracks on sets like these before, even on big ones like I believe Karajan's DG Tchaikovsky or similar, like the 4th movement of two of the symphonies will be like that, haha. I have no idea how these things are decided or even how these releases are uploaded/submitted or even just collated by YouTube or if by the distribution labels themselves, and thus how the track info gets decided.
*brutally mogs Gould*
>>122778826Of course, Gould is a carnival sideshow compared to S. Richter.
>>122778826quite right
>>122777197seethe whiteboi
>>122778866why would i be mad that your dopamine receptors are fried? fuck off back to >>>/gif/
>>122776564>one of the greatest pianists currently alive>also is super hot and has a phat assa bit unfair don't you think?
>>122778935You zoomers have the most mid taste ever I swear. Which is fine for me I guess, just means younger girls of your generation that are actually hot and attractive will be more desperate and sex-starved and easier to sleep with.
>>122778935>>122778953both of you can kindly fuck off to >>>/gif/ and discuss your porn addictions there instead
>>122778875>>122778982>still seething
npSorry for the Mahler recording/album art spam lately but these ones are too cool and unique not to post. I got high hopes this'll be the one that finally makes me fall in love with the 7th too
>>122778743Some heartwarmingly beautiful piano music off the same release, only 4:30 if you have the time to spare, highly recommendedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeUhPAKbBTA&list=OLAK5uy_k-s_3dCdGAhK-b2eL8CC2jJ6Vd9As_VAI&index=11
>>122779014>still addicted to porn
>>122779076yes, and I'm based for that.
Do you like Mitsuko Uchida? I don't normally enjoy Asian performers but she sounds good.
>>122779151your prefrontal cortex is shrunken from that>>122779154not particularly spectacular.
Anyone else like to listen to an overture or similar singular, short orchestral piece before putting on another longer work, eg another symphony? Nice way to replicate the concert experience for recordings that don't include one. Lately I been using various Wagner pieces, especially as I've seen Siegfried Idyll and Tannhauser's Bacchanale used in this manner a lot. It's a great way to enhance the listening experience.>>122779154Not a fan, but anyone at that level is gonna be some level of 'good' at minimum so nothing wrong if you like her.
>>122779154Good at some modernist stuff, like Debussy or Schoenberg
Listening to
>>122779154>75 years oldStill would. I'll check out her albums.>>122779164Cry about it. Its gook gilf goonin' good times tonight...(no racial)
>>122779520this is just plain embarrassing
the 7th was great but still my least favorite of his symphonies. here's the dope cover of the 8th -- i'm always excited to listen to a new recording of this work, should be really good!
>>122779548you seething about porn/cooming on 4channel.org is embarrassing
What is Mozart's best Concerto?
>>122779687you still haven’t explained why anyone else should be mad that your dopamine receptors are cooked>>122779691none of them are about jerking off to kids so they’re not relevant to you.
>>122779691Any of the piano concertos from no. 19 and up is a valid answer. For me, currently I would say the 27th. No, 24th. Wait, 23! Yeah at present, 27, final answer.
>>12277969117
Rank Mozart's genres. I think we all know his operas are his most important creations.
>>122779713maho is 21 doebeit
>>122779841Man I wish I liked opera.
>>122776577how tf do you quit?
>>122779875no one asked, chomo>>122779908have you tried not jerking off for 10 seconds?
The only time Beethoven was not concise is in the finale of the great B-flat Major Sonata, which Liszt alone was said to have been able to play, and in which more enjoyment was got out of his virtuosity than out of what was being played. Conciseness seems to be the secret of music; when melody ceases and is replaced by some kind of working out, the effect is lost. Beethoven is the first composer in whom everything is melody; it was he who showed how from one and the same theme a succession of new themes arise which are complete in themselves.
>>122779895If you don't like opera you're just retarded. Not only does the human voice offer unique qualities to music in itself, but it has loaned its many qualities to purely instrumental music also, so an unfamiliarity with vocal music is a fundamental unfamiliarity with a great deal of instrumental music too. And how on earth can you not enjoy something as simple as the Queen of the Night aria?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDUyA-fVie8
>>122779959whoever wrote this is clearly unfamiliar with the missa solemnis and the late quartets. also. how are the first movement and slow movement of the hammerklavier concise when the finale is apparently lacking in concision despite being shorter than both?
don giovanni is midle nozze di figaro is goodzauberflote is goodcosì fan tutte is midno one cares about the others
npgood night
>>122780081Concision =/= length, doofus.
>>122780111reiner is really not an idiomatic mahlerian>>122780117explain what is so developmentally demanding about the first and slow movement that it requires greater length while the finale should be shorter.
>>122779949I asked, maho is cute
>>122780081technically first movement is shorter than the finale if taken at the metronome marking
>>122780137not interested, nonce
>>122780133>it requires greater lengthDude, melodic concision has nothing to do with a movement's length, you need to learn the meaning of words.
>>122780061Hey, I get it, I just don't like operatic singing. I love choral vocals -- I can listen to a mass or oratorio or cantata or choral songs all day. Operatic singing though... I'll get used to it eventually, I keep trying and trying, about once a week I'll through on one of Mozart's or Wagner's or Verdi's and it's usually off within a couple scenes. It'll click one of those times, I hope.
>>122780168even if the exposition repeat is taken?>>122780179the author of that quote never mentioned melodic concision, only concision and then the virtues of melody over development (which is also remarkably foolish, as if there was ever anything in beethoven that wasn’t either expositional or developmental)
>>122780208>the author of that quote never mentioned melodic concisionMelody and concision are explicitly correlated.>the virtues of melody over developmentThat's not what was said either. You have very low levels of verbal comprehension. The argument is that Beethoven perfectly united melody with development. You know, the thing that makes Beethoven one of the founding fathers of romanticism.
>>122780287>Melody and concision are explicitly correlated.do you even know what concision means? it’s a descriptor, not a musical term. unless the author specifically talks about melodic concision, it could mean anything from harmony to form (the usual and most reasonable assumption) or even counterpoint. >The argument is that Beethoven perfectly united melody with development. a false one. nothing in the hammerklavier’s finale is inherently any less “melodic” than the grosse fuge or the et vitam venturi fugue of the credo. all these represent are an increasing sophistication in contrapuntal development and skill. >You know, the thing that makes Beethoven one of the founding fathers of romanticism.the romantic impulse may have been derived from beethoven, but nothing about beethoven is romantic. everything he ever did exists within the boundaries of the classical era.
>>122780170Maho cute.......
>>122780198Because operatic singing in the modern sense is not at all how they sang in old times. Modern musical practice destroys opera
>>122780367not interested, chomo
>>122780385Adorable maho....
>>122780356>unless the author specifically talks about melodic concision,Which he does. Learn to read.>nothing in the hammerklavier’s finale is inherently any less “melodic” than the grosse fuge or the et vitam venturi fugue of the credoIt was never stated to be less melodic because of its fugal qualities, that's your projection.>the romantic impulse may have been derived from beethoven, but nothing about beethoven is romantic.Utterly retarded. An overarching programmatic idea which at the same time vitalises the smallest cells of music is Romantic. That it can exist within classical forms does nothing to negate its Romantic character, and its entrance upon history within the Romantic movement. Without Romantic culture there is no explanation or justification for the direction in which he took music.
>>122780381yes very truevibrato laden wobblers are anti voice
>>122780474Are there any good non vibrato performances?
>>122780508no vibrato is also bad, you just need to not go overboard with it. anyway, opera singing is completely hopeless and has been for decades. you can still find good singing in a modern Bach cantata performance though
The Verdi operas we saw together were The Masked Ball, Il Trovatore, Rigoletto and La Traviata, but Aïda was the only one which he liked at all. For him, the plots of Italian operas laid too much emphasis upon theatrical effect. He objected to trickery, knavery and deception as the basic elements of a dramatic situation. He said to me once, "What would these Italians do if they had no daggers?" He found Verdi's music too unpretentious, relying too much on melody. How rich and varied by comparison was Wagner's range! One day when we heard an organ grinder playing La donna e mobile, Adolf said, "There's your Verdi!" When I replied that no composer was safe from such profanation of his works, he barked at me furiously, "Can you imagine Lohengrin's narration on a barrel organ?"
>>122780430>Which he does. Learn to read.wrong. point out a single instance of the word melody in the following excerpt where he discussions concision:>The only time Beethoven was not concise is in the finale of the great B-flat Major Sonata, which Liszt alone was said to have been able to play, and in which more enjoyment was got out of his virtuosity than out of what was being played. he only begins to discuss melody AFTER this, during which it is obviously unclear as to what he means by concision, because he drops the word just as quickly as he begins it. in other words, the writer is terrible at commanding language to convey a point, regardless of the sort of concision he is referring to. >It was never stated to be less melodic because of its fugal qualitiesyou’re right, it was never stated to be less melodic for any reason other than being virtuosic, which is just as applicable to the other fugues mentioned (which is to say, not at all. none of these works are more virtuosic than necessary to achieve their contrapuntal complexity, which is the primary criticism of excessively virtuosic music), the former of which is the most rhythmically complicated piece of music beethoven ever wrote and the latter of which is the single hardest passage in the entire standard choral repertoire. in comparison, the hammerklavier is only noteworthy because it is limited to 2 hands and 10 fingers. >An overarching programmatic idea there are only 2 beethoven pieces in which programmaticism breaches the realm of absolute music, the pastorale symphony and the les adieux sonata. none of his other works have programmatic leanings (beyond the ones obviously written in the forms of program music like the sacred works and fidelio); anything proclaiming otherwise is wagnerian schlock. (1/2)
>>122780430>>122780689>Without Romantic culture there is no explanation or justification for the direction in which he took music.romantic culture didn’t even exist in music until after beethoven’s death. there are so many easy explanations for the late period that don’t involve romanticism whatsoever; an increased interest in the contrapuntal and formal styles of the pre-classical masters, a desire to achieve a total unity of form, harmony and motivic development, a telescoping and development of sonata form and variation form designed to fully work out (so much for melody being the antithesis of working out) the motifs and harmonic tensions of the given movement; if i were to list every single inclination of beethoven’s late period, i’d be writing my own book on it. the easiest way to disprove any notions of romanticism in late beethoven is to directly compare him to late schubert, in which we can see the definitive flowering of early romanticism. there is no inclination to lyrical melody over counterpoint and classical form in beethoven as there is in schubert, nor is beethoven’s harmony ever as deliberately chromatic and modulatory to an expressive (and not developmental) end as schubert’s. there is more in common between, say, the Eb major op 127 quartet and any given haydn quartet than there is between the same work and schubert’s string quintet, or between any moment of the last 3 piano sonatas and schubert’s own last 3 piano sonatas. they exist in entirely different realms. (2/2)>>122780399not interested, kiddy diddler.
>>122780538Why is it specifically Bach cantatas that get all the good singers? I wish I could hear the Netherlands Bach Collegium singers do Magic Flute or Don Giovanni
>>122780875HIPster is a tranime pedo? color me shocked.
>>122776564ravel > de bussy
>>122779841>Rank Mozart's genres1. Opera2. Concerto3. Wind ensemble4. Chamber music for strings5. Symphonies / orchestral6. Chamber music with piano7. Choral8. Solo piano
>>122781378>opera that highDelusional
>>122780689>he only begins to discuss melody AFTER thisYes, in RESPONSE to a statement about melody, and they are then conflated by discussing the result of a lack of concision and a lack of melody as if they were the same thing, or at least intertwined. It is a united statement which for some reason you are interpreting as separate statements with nothing to do with each other. You need basic reading comprehension.>it was never stated to be less melodic for any reason other than being virtuosicThat's not what was said either. The mention of virtuosity only has to do with Liszt, not with the nature of the piece itself, except insofar as it implies a technical impressiveness. For some reason you are going on a tangent about virtuosoism and fugues when concision/melody is never set at odds with these things. What you should be looking at is the melodic quality of that movement, which is the thing actually being discussed. Everything you are being confused about would be solved if you just read the paragraph properly.>there are only 2 beethoven pieces in which programmaticism breaches the realm of absolute musicWe're not discussing whether or not a programmatic idea 'breaches' the realm of absolute music, we're discussing whether it is usual for Beethoven to have a unifying programmatic idea behind a piece, which it undoubtedly is. The third symphony would never have been written without the idea of a hero behind it. The extreme contrasts, everything innovative about it, is without purpose before the Romantic culture of his time. And of course, it is to be expected that the more the Classical period receded, the less people were stumped or confused by his music.>romantic culture didn’t even exist in music until after beethoven’s death.Hahah lol, Schiller, Goethe and E.T.A Hoffmann weren't Romantic? You are a fucking idiot. I'm sure Beethoven's comparisons of his music with organic processes is also Baroque....
>>122781513>Yes, in RESPONSE to a statement about melodynot that i would know, given the beginning of my quote is literally also the beginning of your quote. >It is a united statement which for some reason you are interpreting as separate statements with nothing to do with each other.perhaps because the writer drops the concept of concision as quickly as he begins yapping about melody. it’s not hard to get how the general statement is incoherent and lacking in unifying nomenclature. >The mention of virtuosity only has to do with Liszt, not with the nature of the piece itself, except insofar as it implies a technical impressiveness.then why mention virtuosity at all if it is supposedly utterly unrelated to the concept of “melodic concision”? either the supposed virtuosity is at odds with melody (in which case, see my statements above) or it isn’t and has no bearing on the rest of the argument whatsoever. in any instance, what a terribly written excerpt. >What you should be looking at is the melodic quality of that movement, which is the thing actually being discussed. and even so, the hammerklavier fugue is no more or less singable than the grosse fuge’s angular subjects or (ironically enough) the infamously unsingable et vitam fugue. the inanity of this statement holds steadfast. >we're discussing whether it is usual for Beethoven to have a unifying programmatic idea behind a piecethis essentially never happens. the notion that it does is the invention of failed musicologists turned glorified journalists. (1/2)
>>122781513>>122781607>The third symphony would never have been written without the idea of a hero behind itlet’s conveniently ignore the fact that there is no programmatic sequence of events that makes any logical sense in the context of the eroica (the hero dies in the slow movement and then magically comes back to life for the scherzo and finale?), that the theme of the finale is one beethoven already used twice prior with no relevance whatsoever to napoleon or any sort of vague heroism, and that the concept of the funeral march also already exists in the op. 26 piano sonata with, again, no relevance to any overarching program or heroism. am i seriously supposed to believe that there is some sort of undefinable aspect to the first movement (and the first movement alone, unless the short ditty of a scherzo is supposed to also somehow represent “heroism”, lmao) that somehow could not exist without some sort of vague indefinable program that exists neither in beethoven’s letters nor in the scire, when the entire movement follows the basic logical precepts surrounding sonata form, motivic development and harmonic resolution? you act as if extreme contrasts didn’t exist in haydn and mozart, what a farce. >And of course, it is to be expected that the more the Classical period receded, the less people were stumped or confused by his music.and the more the romantic period receded, the less people were stumped or confused by parsifal or bruckner’s 9th. i suppose that makes them modernists in disguise, or so you would have us believe. >Hahah lol, Schiller, Goethe and E.T.A Hoffmann weren't Romantic?so i’m supposed to believe that romanticism in music existed prior to beethoven because of… literary authors? i think you’ve lost the plot. > I'm sure Beethoven's comparisons of his music with organic processes is also Baroqueas opposed to which composer comparing their music to mechanical processes? what an irrelevant factoid.
>>122781607>not that i would knowMeant to say in response to a statement about concision.>the writer drops the concept of concision as quickly as he begins yapping about melodyThe entire talk of melody is following on from the statement about concision.>then why mention virtuosity at allBecause he is talking about the effect of the piece, which doesn't come from the melody.>the hammerklavier fugue is no more or less singableSingability is not what's being described with melodic concision. It's like you have zero understanding of what is unique about Beethoven's use of motives. >this essentially never happens.You are disregarding Beethoven's entire view of his own music, evident in copious biographical documents.>conveniently ignore the fact that there is no programmatic sequence of events No, let's not ignore that. Your stupidity is in thinking a programmatic idea must be a completely mapped out musical program a la Berlioz or Wagner. That's not required for something to be Romantically programmatic, and I have already repeated that point. What you also say, such as presupposing that the emotional content of a funeral march is restricted to mourning for the dead, is just the result of this misunderstanding as to what programmatic means. In the simplest sense, the Eroica is an expression of the tribulations and triumph of heroism, it is so obviously fitted to a heroic subject you would have to be completely disingenuous to deny its significance to Beethoven's larger outlook on the world and its emotional significance to him. You might as well deny there is anything 'triumphant' about the finale, because that is by definition programmatic. Why not take it a step further and say the very idea of 'triumph' couldn't have had any significance for Beethoven.
>>122781607>>122782044>i suppose that makes them modernists in disguiseExcept no one was confused at a fundamental level about their music. People may have disliked them, and eventually became accustomed to them, but they were never confused as to WHY they composed. But with Beethoven this was the case. There is the well known account of Weber describing Beethoven as fit for a madhouse, because his use of classical forms could only be put down to 'eccentricity' by many people, whereas it was a pure blooded Romantics like Hoffmann that first understood it was not eccentricity that organised his music.>literary authors? i think you’ve lost the plot.I say Beethoven was a founder of Romantic music, and that his music is completely an expression of the Romantic culture of his time. You deny this because "Romantic music didn't exist in Beethoven's time," as if you're not aware what my stance on the matter is.
>>122780887To be fair, you need to have a very high iq to enjoy anime and HIP
>>122782053This, both are the highezt iq forms of entertainment.
>>122782044>The entire talk of melody is following on from the statement about concision.which is why it’s not unreasonable to perceive the notion that the author is making two borderline unrelated statements as opposed to a single tenuously connected statement that switches gears midway through for no apparent reason. >Because he is talking about the effect of the piece, which doesn't come from the melody.nor does it come from the virtuosity. it comes from the counterpoint, because it’s a fugue, duh. >Singability is not what's being described with melodic concisionapparently, nothing is. i’m supposed to believe that there is some singular ephemeral aspect to the hammerklavier’s fugal subject that makes it so unmelodious where there are a dozen other fugal subjects by beethoven equally as treacherous in contour or difficult in rapidity, yet neither you nor the writer can define it. >It's like you have zero understanding of what is unique about Beethoven's use of motives.more like i have zero understanding of what relation the hammerklavier’s fugal subject has to any notion of “melodic concision” that apparently has no relation to length, nor contour, nor phrase structure. >evident in copious biographical documents.such as? please, quote me one, bonus points if it’s regarding the eroica. >What you also say, such as presupposing that the emotional content of a funeral march is restricted to mourning for the dead, is just the result of this misunderstanding as to what programmatic means.if program music is just music that expresses an emotion, then i suppose rondo ala turk must be program music too, making mozart the true primogenitor of romanticism. or how about haydn’s emperor quartet; the quotation of the anthem to the emperor must make it program music too. the word has become so loosely defined as to cease to hold any meaning. (1/2)
Anime is the opera of our generation, fact
>>122782044>>122782136>In the simplest sense, the Eroica is an expression of the tribulations and triumph of heroismexcept it’s not. there is nothing inherent to the eroica’s expression that doesn’t already exist in the op. 26 piano sonata or the op. 35 eroica variations, relative to the slow movement and finale respectively. compare the first movement to the contemporaneous op. 59 razumovsky quartets or the op. 51 and 53 piano sonatas and any delusions of some sort of vague expression of heroism quickly fade when you realize that the musical logic between all these vastly different works is consistent in spite of the lack of any sort of program. >You might as well deny there is anything 'triumphant' about the finale, because that is by definition programmatic.so a boisterous and triumphant finale is all that is required for music to be programmatic? suddenly the vast majority of the classical era is programmatic. everything from haydn’s symphonies to mozart’s piano sonatas to bach’s orchestral suites is now program music, because apparently all that is required for something to be defined as program music is a suitably dramatic closure, and not a reasonably definable program as per the origin of the word. i can’t imagine having such a nonsensical sense of semantics. >Except no one was confused at a fundamental level about their music.so lowe making fundamental alterations to the structure and harmony of bruckner’s 9th didn’t stem from confusion and only “dislike”? what makes that any different from the reception of the grosse fuge or the op. 127 quartet? >they were never confused as to WHY they composed.more nonsensical semantics. unless you can definitively prove that none of wagner’s or bruckner’s or mahler’s or any other equally progressive composer’s critics questioned the legitimacy of their compositions (a futile task; you cannot prove a negative, so why make the claim?), this statement is meaningless. (2/3)
>>122782044>>122782136>>122782169>>122782049>There is the well known account of Weber describing Beethoven as fit for a madhousea quote from a secondary source (schindler) that has been proven false by this point. >The oft-repeated claim that Carl Maria von Weber considered the chromatic bass line in the coda of the first movement evidence that Beethoven was "ripe for the madhouse" seems to have been the invention of Beethoven's first biographer, Anton Schindler. His possessive adulation of Beethoven is well-known, and he was criticised by his contemporaries for his obsessive attacks on Weber. According to John Warrack, Weber's biographer, Schindler was characteristically evasive when defending Beethoven, and there is "no shred of concrete evidence" that Weber ever made the remark. >I say Beethoven was a founder of Romantic music, and that his music is completely an expression of the Romantic culture of his time.beethoven’s music is an expression of beethoven’s music. “the romantic culture at the time” has no relation to the definition of romanticism within musical parameters, which you should familiarize yourself with considering we’re on the music board and not the philosophy or literature one. >>122782053>>122782130>>122782146pedophile moment
>>122782136>which is why it’s not unreasonable to perceive the notion that the author is making two borderline unrelated statementsAs I already said, he conflates, or correlates, melody and concision in Beethoven's music when he describes a singular fault as resulting from their lack.>nor does it come from the virtuosity. it comes from the counterpointAgain, the music itself was never described as virtuosic. At least that wasn't a major point. And the diversity in how a composer writes and contextualises a fugue will give enough range for a lack of concision to be spoken of. It's not as if fugues have one and one only effect.>hammerklavier’s fugal subjectI don't recall the fugal subject being blamed for a lack of concision in the larger movement, and I don't think you would claim how Beethoven handles that subject is 'expected' from the subject itself.>please, quote me one, bonus points if it’s regarding the eroica.There is no need to prove that Beethoven felt his music was an expression of his lived experiences and worldview. It's a simply shown as looking at the Ninth with the words removed, its significance remains and is obvious to everyone.>rondo ala turkAh yes, totally comparable to a full scale symphony pushing the boundaries of emotional pathos and diversity and their unity in an organic progression. The simple truth is that music since the beginning of time has had programmatic elements, sometimes inspiring it, sometimes appearing in odd places, but NEVER to the supremely Romantic degree of Beethoven in which a musical structure is like an organic being.
>>122782136>>122782326>here is nothing inherent to the eroica’s expression that doesn’t already exist in the op. 26 piano sonata or the op. 35 eroica variationsI've said many times, Beethoven remaining within classical forms does not negate the Romantic significance of his use of them.>so a boisterous and triumphant finale is all that is required for music to be programmatic?See the above statements about the intimate relation between absolute and programmatic music. To call a finale triumphant is programmatic, and it goes to show our appreciation of music cannot exist without some involvement of it. But to compare any triumphalism in music before Beethoven, with the the triumph of the Eroica, will immediately show the Romantic nature of the latter.>fundamental alterations to the structure and harmony of bruckner’s 9th didn’t stem from confusion and only "dislike"?I think so, yes. If it is confusion, it is confusion at his decisions within an accepted idea of music, it's not like Bruckner was creating a whole new idea of music such as Beethoven was.I know Weber had an extreme admiration for Beethoven, but I believe the 'ripe for the madhouse' comment is consistent with certain opinions Weber is recorded having about, what seemed to be, an inexplicable eccentricity on Beethoven's part. At any rate, it is a comment that is representative of what the aging Classical world thought of Beethoven.Beethoven's music is an expression of the poetic and religious ideas of his Romantic time. Strip the Pastoral symphony of any program, and one can just as easily see that it is an expression of nature. In the same way, if there were some Baroque work composed on the exact same program, it would no more grab the essence of nature than any other Baroque piece. Because Beethoven was a Romantic, and Romanticism is not opposed to Classical form. That is so demonstrable that arguing against it makes you an idiot.
>>122782326>As I already said, he conflates, or correlates, melody and concision in Beethoven's music when he describes a singular fault as resulting from their lack.and as i already said, he is a bad writer and this is unclear because of his liberal use of inconsistent terminology. >Again, the music itself was never described as virtuosic. yes it was. don't lie. >And the diversity in how a composer writes and contextualises a fugue will give enough range for a lack of concision to be spoken of. the contrapuntal development of the hammerklavier fugue is completely in line with the other major fugues of late beethoven, so again, not exclusive to that particular movement. you have yet to define what is so inconcise about that specific fugue that is somehow still present in the grosse fuge or the et vitam fugue. >I don't think you would claim how Beethoven handles that subject is 'expected' from the subject itself.it absolutely is. have you taken even a cursory glance at it? it's an absurdly long and winding subject that creates countless passing tone dissonances at a whim. it's no surprise at all that beethoven's resolution for the subject ends up involving a simple cantus firmus countersubject to balance out the inherent complexity of the primary fugal subject. >There is no need to prove that Beethoven felt his music was an expression of his lived experiences and worldview.translation: i refuse to prove my point of view because i cannot, it must be true because i (and my faggy romantic authors) said so. >It's a simply shown as looking at the Ninth with the words removedyou mean the first 3 movements without chorus? looks plenty in line with the classical era to me. >totally comparable to a full scale symphony pushing the boundaries of emotional pathos and diversity and their unity in an organic progressionthose boundaries were already broken in the op. 51 and 53 piano sonatas, no program necessary. (1/2)
>>122782326>>122782413>but NEVER to the supremely Romantic degree of Beethoven in which a musical structure is like an organic being.you have obviously never studied musical structure, because if you have, you'd realize that mozart's forms are infinitely more "organic" and "concise" than anything beethoven ever wrote. the genius of beethoven lies in his skill for effortless and totally coherent motivic and dramatic development, not in "organic" structure as opposed to what, GMO structure? >Beethoven remaining within classical forms does not negate the Romantic significance of his use of them.good thing i was talking about expression in that specific excerpt and not form. the fact that the forms of their respective movements match is only the icing on the cake. and as if any discussion about expression in classical music can somehow be divorced from form (or counterpoint, or harmony, or melody, or development) regardless. >To call a finale triumphant is programmatic,then mozart is no less programmatic, nor is haydn, nor are bach or handel. the word programmatic has lost all meaning. >But to compare any triumphalism in music before Beethoven, with the the triumph of the Eroicathe triumph of the eroica is not even nearly as impressive as you make it out to be. the op. 59 no. 3 quartet puts it in shambles in terms of joviality and implacability of energy, and that's specifically choosing a contemporaneous work. there are dozens of early period beethoven works with equally bombastic finales, you only focus on the eroica because it has a convenient title that lends well to projecting one's fantasies onto it. you would do well as a program note writer at a third rate regional symphony orchestra. (2/3)
>>122782179Maho is canonically an adult thoughbeit
When are we gonna get anime adaptations of opera so the sisterposter kills himself?
>>122782326>>122782338>>122782413>>122782477>it's not like Bruckner was creating a whole new idea of music such as Beethoven was.bruckner's conception of form and structure is utterly and completely divorced from virtually every other composer and piece before him, to the degree that the leap from beethoven's 9th (the obvious starting point) to bruckner's 1st is infinitesimally greater than the leap from haydn's 104th to beethoven's 1st. the difference is that bruckner was an obsessive who rewrote the same symphony 11 times, while beethoven quickly moved on to the next idea. by the time we reach bruckner's 9th, it has more in common with mahler and even schoenberg harmonically, formally, and motivically than anything beethoven could ever have conceived. for a romantic, you sure are musically illiterate about actual romantic composers. >but I believe the 'ripe for the madhouse' comment is consistent with certain opinions Weber is recorded havingtranslation: i believe it's true, therefore it is. screw what actual historians and biographers say. >At any rate, it is a comment that is representative of what the aging Classical world thought of Beethoven.if only you had an actual real quote by this socalled "aging classical world" instead of a fake one from the composer of die freischutz, arguably the first german romantic opera. >Beethoven's music is an expression of the poetic and religious ideas of his Romantic timefalse. beethoven's music is an expression of beethoven's music. (3/4)
The Sky and the Kosmos are one https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l_UHaulsw3M&pp=ygUJa29udGFrdGUg
>>122782326>>122782338>>122782413>>122782477>>122782528>Strip the Pastoral symphony of any program, and one can just as easily see that it is an expression of nature. if you stripped the pastoral symphony of any program, it would no longer exist, much like if i stripped your DNA out of your body, you would turn into a pile of formless flesh. likewise, if by "stripping" you mean simply introducing the work to the uninformed listener without the program, then yes, it obviously would allude to nature because, you know, it competently depicts its programmatic content. either way, a completely meaningless statement that says nothing about the definition or nature of program music. >In the same way, if there were some Baroque work composed on the exact same program, it would no more grab the essence of nature than any other Baroque piece.complete and utter drivel. "the essence of nature" has no musical meaning, nor does the idea that the baroque style (or any given style of music) is inept at portraying programmatic imagery given the immense content of baroque oratorios, operas and sacred music. you are not even a dilettante, you are a pseud who wishes he was one.>Because Beethoven was a Romantic, and Romanticism is not opposed to Classical form.in musical terminology, they have two separate meanings that can intersect but are clearly definable between one another, unlike your hocus pocus bullshit. if you're so fond of talking about music in ways which are obviously not musical, kindly fuck off to >>>/lit/, where they are equally as unmusical as you are. >>122782497go fantasize about diddling kids somewhere else
>>122782508An excellent question sister
>>122782544Wrong
>>122782568you wish
What are some /classical/ approved anime?
>>122782634Classicaloid
>>122782634lotgh
>>122782634Steins;Gate
>>122782634Kaguya Sama Love Is War
>>122782634Jojo
>>122782634I haven’t actually seen it but there’s one called Hibike Euphonium
>>122782634Gauche the Cellist. It does the "visualisation of Beethoven's Sixth Symphony in a movie" shtick better than I've seen done anywhere else.
damn you faggots really argued about that dumb shit all night huh
>>122782634Gabriel Dropout
>>122782053SEX with MAHO
>>122782634Love Live School Idol Project
>>122782954Marriage and wholesome cuddling with maho
>>122782634Pokémon
>>122780381>>122780474>>122780538Well good to know I'm not alone.
>>122782634>>122782643>>122782666>>122782689>>122782697>>122782705>>122782707>>122782810>>122782887>>122782967>>122783232we did it animeCHADS! We gee-golly gottem! Funny!
>>122783690Fact checked and true
These Kondrashin Mahler album covers are really nice, and I've heard great things about the recordings themselves too!
Who is the cutest composer?
>Wagner can be mentioned alongside such exceptional film biographies as Gandhi, Reds and Abel Gance's Napoléon ... Wagner is one of the most beautifully photographed motion pictures in history.Okay, this is kinohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkQfTIa0MZo
>>122783807Vivaldi
>>122783807Scriabin
>>122783807Mozart
>>122783807https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUl4qUOgKoI
>>122783807Young Rachmaninoff is the most handsome.
>>122784046Most handsome is Liszt
>>122784065Liszt is androgynous, but yes he looks majestic. Rachmaninoff is more handsome.
>>122784083No woman has a jaw like this.
>>122784112
>>122784112>>122784133I didn't say he looks feminine
>>122784156What on earth does androgynous mean for a man if not feminine?
>>122784180>not clearly male or female>neither specifically feminine nor masculine>having the characteristics or nature of both male and femaleIn what world is androgynous same as feminine?
>>122783890Maximianno Cobra i kneel...
ReminderComposers with paintings >>>>> composers with photos
>>122784206Doesn't explain how Chopin > any composer before him
>>122784206Composers with both > composers with only one
>>122784228Chopin sux
>>122784247Bach > any composer with a photo.
>>122784253Only on the opposite day
>>122784262Bach has a photo
>>122784262Bach was only good at mathematics and counterpoint. Mogged by the "big" Romantics.
>>122784284>t. Never actually listened to bach and only heard him described by youtubers and tiktok zoomers
>>122784290I listened to most of his fugues so no.
Bachmaninoff
>>122784197Everything you are saying means 'feminine' if the androgynous subject is a male. It must be a feminine male, or a masculine female, to be androgynous.
>>122784337No, you can't seem to read properly>having the characteristics or nature of both male and femaleFeminine male is not androgynous, he is just feminine.
The fugue is a poor form. It’s too strict and formulaic to make what I consider fine music
npespecially excited since this was the main suggestion from this cycle
>>122784354What, are you saying that Liszt has female genitalia?
>>122784634No. But he has androgynous features. His jaw is masculine in some paintings(but more androgynous in pictures), cheeks, brows, eyes also look androgynous(not feminine - but androgynous). He is still obviously more masculine than androgynous, and the most majestic looking composer. But not the most 'handsome'.
>>122784605Fantastic recording. Greatest Adagietto I've ever heard too, I think. I should upload all of these recordings to YouTube for more people to listen.
next upand wow this cover is badass lol
>>122785092I'll probably do so on my channel soon but I imagine it will get a copyright strike.
>>122785221actually scratch that, gonna try this>>122785246That'd be neat. And ah, guess we'll have to see. Have you heard pic? It's 65 minutes total LOL. If not, check this out:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2cOEopMJLY&list=OLAK5uy_mD5Yp_Aax3GEY3ZaHOAGPeyY7EKDaLqiQ&index=1Wild!
>>122785286This is like listening to Stokowski's Brahms 4 but on steroids.
>>122785221is the demon lady setting everything on fire supposed to be alma or something?>>122785286the kondrashin mahler cycle is one of the weirdest ones there is, but it’s surprisingly not terrible. i wouldn’t call any of the recordings my favorites or terribly idiomatic, but compared to cattle or hardon he may as well be walter or klemperer.
>>122776743
>>122785412I couldn't explain any of the covers but the visual vibe of each seems to match with the works well, and they just look good lol.I'm surprised you don't hate the Kondrashin M6 the same way you hate the Stokowski Brahms 4! But I guess even though the blistering tempos are relatively similar, the Kondrashin manages to artfully preserve the emotional tone of the work instead of inverting it. And yeah I can already tell it's gonna be a nice change-of-pace to work through it while simultaneously listening through the Chailly / Gewandhaus.
>>12278528665 minutes is not too weird. Walter does it in less time. I agree with the other poster that Kondrashin is a good Mahlerian but the Russian orchestras didn't exactly have an idiomatic Mahler sound.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hh0dlwkA9-s nice 7th from Kondrashin with the Concertgebouw.
>>122785539Oh damn -- I really need to actually listen to the entirety of that Walter set at some point, I think I only ever listened to the 2nd, which was great, so I don't know why I haven't especially considering I almost always love Walter's recordings. And added that one, thank you. I'll probably listen to the one from the cycle I already added though first in pic.
>>122785587Walter's Mahler 5 is a 78rpm recording near the end of the shellac era, before everyone moved onto LPs. Because of that it has limited mono sonics, but it's on the short list of Mahler 5s that I actually like.
>>122785535the stokowski brahms 4 loses any semblance of relation to the work and enters the territory of self-parody. the kondrashin mahler on the other hand is totally within the realms of reasonable interpretation, it’s mostly the typical dry steely russian orchestral timbre that sounds foreign to mahler.
>>122785643Hey, that's what I said! lol glad you agree though, except I do find the Stokowski Brahms 4 enjoyable but I would never recommend it or consider it properly representative of the piece; more of a fun, enjoyable novelty.>>122785622That's your favorite one from him? I'll finally listen through his after these two cycles I'm currently working my way through -- don't tell sisteranon but I might revisit the MTT cycle too, I think I gave up on it too early; listened to his 4th yesterday I believe and loved it.
>>122785286The Andante off this is stellar, wow. For anyone else who wants to listen:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmO2cWNK56M&list=OLAK5uy_mD5Yp_Aax3GEY3ZaHOAGPeyY7EKDaLqiQ&index=3
>>122785469>medici.tvtheir performances are dreadful
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4yH4B9deok&ab_channel=RussianPhilharmonic-MoscowCitySymphonyP.Dukas. The Sorcerer's Apprentice
>>122785787literal mickey mouse music
>>122785643Nah. The Stokowski Brahms 4 slaps.
>>122785685Probably, yeah. I like his 4th and 1st too, but the 9th and Das Lied don't enter my realm of favorites, and the 2nd isn't a symphony I'm crazy about on the whole.
>>122785685i don’t find the stokowski brahms 4 enjoyable so much as i do shrill and insufferable. >>122785813i wish i could slap leopold, yes.
>tfw no breast cancer waifuF
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu1BX1N9RyU&ab_channel=symphony7526Sibelius: Finlandia, Op. 26
>>122785878the worst composer in the world
don't you just love it when recordings take ppp markings so literally you can't hear what is being played no matter the volume so it I effectively dead silence?
>>122779154no. Terrible Mozart and Beethoven. Maybe she's good at something else but I won't bother checking it out. She tries to make every movement have a single defining sound instead of taking the listener through its many different colors (mostly by ignoring dynamic markings).
Sibelius Karelia suite Op 11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66_9-7sqwmU&ab_channel=SonorumConcentusRomanticEra
>>122785964yes. the composer wouldn’t have written ppp or pppp unless he wanted near silence
>>122786041>near silenceso not at all what I said, good job not reading!
>>122786041You can more pp There's a Ligeti piece which says pppppppp
>>122786064>waaaaaah i cant hear itskill issue>>122786213yes, but i was operating under the assumption that we were talking about music
- Études for Piano (Book 1), No. 4https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWJa3tfQQ5I&ab_channel=ThomasLigreMom's Ligeti
>>122786241Yes. A skill issue of the performer
Now that I think about it, I don't think I've heard a Kondrashin recording or even cycle I didn't like. Great conductor, always a fine choice when unsure or wanting to try something new.
>>122785835>and the 2nd isn't a symphony I'm crazy about on the whole.Yeah it's my second least favorite, only ahead of the 7th. Still great but a little, shall we say, half-baked.
now playingRomeo and Juliet Suite No. 2, Op. 64b:https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_lnxOxWHLhipfWMjnaTarzOJCussBNHDxI&si=Obz7fIpBIkPzHcb1https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_lnxOxWHLhipfWMjnaTarzOJCussBNHDxI
>>122776564
"...This is a disappointing performance for me. The Mahler 10th occupies a very very special place in my heart and my wife's as well. Both Thelma and I remember, with great tenderness and love , that night long ago when we listened to the LP by Wyn Morris and the London Symphony on Philips in my apartment, before we had become engaged, which took place at the Ravinia Festival's opening night performance of the, you guessed it, Mahler 8th, James Levine conducting. A sold out audience and Thelma's first trip to the Park made the night all the more magical, and , before the Second half began, with the suspenseful adagio by the orchestra alone, I asked her to marry me. Listening to the first commercial stereo recording of the Cooke II version on Philips brought us closer together and I have used this music to assist me in times of sadness and loss, such as the recent death of an older brother, this past Autumn from a debilitating stroke 3 years ago. How he lingered and suffered, and finally, like Mahler, found peace and resignation, as we all seek, but often find so elusive."wtf kind of music 'review' is this
>>122776564Till Eulenspiegel's Merry Pranks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QV5r9KG1eyc&ab_channel=%EA%B9%80%EC%A0%95%EC%97%B0>The literal translation of the High German name "Eulenspiegel" is "owl-mirror" (hence owle-glasse). It is both innocuous and indicative of his character and has been explained as a garbled form of an expression for "wipe-the-arse".>Many of Till's pranks are scatological in nature, and involve tricking people into touching, smelling, or even eating Till's excrement. Scatological stories abound, beginning with Till's early childhood (in which he rides behind his father and exposes his rear-end to the townspeople) and persisting until his death bed (where he tricks a priest into soiling his hands with feces).
>>122786397skill issue of your ears>>122786410you will understand mahler when you understand the importance of the 7th. the last 3 symphonies are impossible to imagine without it.
>>122785469BOOBA
>>122786661I mean 'least favorite Mahler' to me is equal to or even better than my favorite of many other conductors. But yes, the 2nd and 7th fall just below the level of me loving them. I just put on the Kondrashin recording, and maybe I'll play it more than usual this week until it clicks. I'm with you on that the Abbado / CSO is my overall favorite recording of it.
>>122786828>conductorswhoops, composers* obviously
let's tryalso got the Sanderling, Barshai, and both Rattles lined up. after that I'll just stick to my favorite one or two of the Mahler 10 completions, which so far are Dausgaard / Seattle and Ormandy / Philadelphia, both very different recordings and remarkable, moving, powerful, and gorgeous in their own ways.
Yngwie Malmsteem Fuguehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H40FZxmhTD4&ab_channel=YngwieMalmsteen
She was so beautiful bros....
>>122787858The Barshai one is funny. Really weird completion.
>>122788136Yuja>
>>122787997not /classical/, try >>>/mu/ instead>>122788291yeah, he literally includes every single instrument he can think of in that thing. bizarre orchestration.
Hi guysWhat's your fav Liszt piece?I'd say it's a tie between Mephisto Waltz No.1 and "concerto pathétique":https://youtu.be/KJbg9V2KnD8?si=LAz-NnBudUKcFZvr(André Laplante plays it better than anyone else even if Horowitz got more spirit but less accuracy)https://youtu.be/UpIR0hZPF8Y?si=e6oasEL525DhsgzX(I like this version and the orchestral one too, I don't remember about how good Richter's interpretation is though)
>>122788443Yes it classical there's an orchestra and everything
how are Simon Rattle's recordings so consistently terrible?
>>122787858I like that one and usually don't like Chailly. His only Mahler I like are 3 and 10.
>>122788685Were you replying to sister's first or second response I can't tell lol
>>122789024an excellent question sister
Is Piston's Harmony and Counterpoint good? Mom gave me her old copies.
>>122788660I mostly go for late Liszt.Années (especially final volume)https://youtube.com/watch?v=5tJRPRrfIpQNuages Grishttps://youtube.com/watch?v=RnkzBbuyy1MTrauergondelhttps://youtube.com/watch?v=axhKyU6amY8Die Zelle im Nonnenwerthhttps://youtube.com/watch?v=fMGF_yFVlAcVia Crucishttps://youtube.com/watch?v=4oIRFN2vuRU
>>122789213NTA but neat thanks, added all of these. I'm constantly reminded Liszt was even more prolific than I thought. Starting out with that Trio Wanderer album because I haven't heard the Smetana Piano Trio in a long time either and would be nice as well.
>>122788685not /classical/, try >>>/mu/ instead>>122788821easy, he’s a talentless and unskilled conductor
>>122790453Nope, sorry sister, it's classical
>>122790480not /classical/, try >>>/mu/ instead
>>122790500Yes classical. Guitar is classical
>>122790647guitar can be /classical/, but this isn’t. try >>>/mu/ instead
>>122790453I mean being consistently bad is one thing but being consistently TERRIBLE is another thing entirely. His phrasing is always so clippy regardless of the context the score calls for.
My god, awful tagging AND out of order (the first part of each piece play one after another, and then so on)
>>122790881It is
>>122791056I wonder if it'd be enjoyable to listen to a release like this on shuffle, actually.
>>122788843It's so good I'm actually listening to it again. I'll check out the 3rd tonight or tomorrow morning (love starting the day with the Mahler 3).>>122788291>>122788443Looking forward to it then!
>>122791087nope, not /classical/. try >>>/mu/ instead. >>122791000because his perception of good is total dogshit to the rest of us, so he consistently aims for his idea of good conducting which sounds like total shit.
Abbado, Solti, and Ormandy may be my three 'default' conductors, I don't think I've ever disliked a recording by any of them, and rarely do I not very much like it at minimum.
>>122791281you will eventually figure out that solti is all brawn and no brains.
Bachhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUcyvuGqOXU
now playingstart of Dvorak - Cello Concerto in B Minor, Op. 104, B. 191:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zihtru_IsIs&list=OLAK5uy_mJJI716isOOpkYX9qEcQkLcYtncYeCV7c&index=2start of Tchaikovsky - Variations on a Rococo Theme for Cello and Orchestra, Op. 33:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLYzhVBqVi4&list=OLAK5uy_mJJI716isOOpkYX9qEcQkLcYtncYeCV7c&index=5https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mJJI716isOOpkYX9qEcQkLcYtncYeCV7c
Tchaikovskyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8C5FhDjTCI
>>122792170based Dvorak appreciator
>>122786633Why are Germans so focused on feces?
>>122785005If you say a man looks androgynous, that means he looks feminine.
>three female conductors at bayreuthIt's so fucking over.
>>122792273I've come to love this work so much lately; well, still trying to 'get' the final movement, lol. Added this recording though, thanks!
>>122792534Conducting isn't the issue at Bayreuth. The issue is the absolute bottom of the barrel singing and horribly cringe productions. Sure, we can throw bad conducting on top of that, but Bayreuth has been "over" for decades now.
>>122792329Who can not like Dvorak!? Hopeful, heartful sentimentality, an original voice, well-crafted compositions, and endlessly prolific so there's so much to discover and enjoy!
did boulez compose any good stuff in your opinion? i've seen acclaim for his conducting but his own work seems divisive
>>122792534the production is going to suck no matter who's conducting so does it really matter?
Man I love Stokowski's Bach and orchestral arrangementsPartita No. 2 in D Minor, BMV 1004: Chaconne (Orchestral):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MTErYL3tXQ&list=OLAK5uy_mFpYWd2JBFk2igZ0X2sAU_aeUeYXF_7-4&index=88
>>122792684https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfwNYN8v3uchttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJ9mNW3s6uEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WuwS94WDRQhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVwez9Siu10I like these works very much. Some of his more harsher stuff I'm not really into, but when he ditched the total serialism and focused more on his Bartok/Debussy/Webern/Wagner influences I could get into his works. He's very good at weaving a wide palette of textures and colors.
>"The booklet timing of 34:20 for the finale is deceptive, as there are several minutes of applause and soloist acknowledgments at the end of the same track. And that particular fact brings me to my one and only complaint: I think any dvd of Mahler 6 would be far more effective with a visual fade-out shortly after the symphony's audio fade-out. Let the screen go completely black for 20 seconds or so. Better yet (and more dramatic as well), turn the screen completely black at the symphony's final A-minor outburst - before the audio fade-out, in other words.I really don't understand why musicians and recording companies feel so insecure, that they think it's necessary to show several minutes of ovation and self congratulations. Let Mahler have his say and then get out. Enough of that."kek. I kinda agree but on a DVD release it's understandable.
>>122792740listening to the first one. sounds interesting so far...
>>122792758DVD releases are essentially supposed to be concert recordings taped for home viewing, so the full concert experience including applause and ovation is to be expected. agreed that applause on live concert album recordings is irritating though.
I'll have my old Arrau records, thank you.
>>122793090your loss
>>122792758Consumers are retarded monkeys that need to have their purchase validated by 5 minutes of applause.
>>122792390You lack basic understanding of words abd can't seem to comprehend a definition.
>>122779154Her opinions are quite based.>I feel very much a European>Through the English language came my clearer thinking. I still don’t think clearly but I’m working at it.>[Japanese is] not a language to clarify your thoughts but to work out your relationship with your neighbour. It’s to do with the degree of familiarity and how to degrade your family by talking up the people you are talking to. [Speaking Japanese is] not just a science but an art form.>Japanese culture has two extremes – utter simplicity and over-the-top vulgarity. The Japanese culture of paper-making is one of the most beautiful I know: it’s a handicraft bordering on art.>I’m not anti-Japan. I’m an outsider. Nationality means nothing to me, it’s not an issue, but it is for most Japanese. For me, what counts is judging things on their merit. That’s why I am against positive discrimination for African-Americans. [In the US] every board has to bend over backwards to select African-Americans. It’s a fact – they really need to push it. Music schools and orchestras have to be seen to have them. If there are two people applying for a place, they take the African-American, even if the other is a little bit better. That’s reverse racism. I don’t go for colour, race or sex. I don’t give a damn. I’m not a feminist. If there is a heaven – I’m not a Christian – and if I arrive at the gate and they ask me what I am, all I will say is, ‘Musician.’
>>122793428If a man is androgynous, that means he is, in some way, more feminine. If a woman is androgynous, that means she is, in some way, more masculine. If a man looks androgynous, and supposing he's not a hermaphrodite, then he is a very feminine man, even if you are unable to tell what gender he is from a first look. But we can all tell what gender Liszt is, no one thinks he looks feminine, so you're a fucking idiot.
>>122793498>that means he is, in some way, more feminine.No, that does not mean he is, in some ways, more feminine. If he was more feminine then he would be just feminine not androgynous. Read the definition.>then he is a very feminine manAgain, not reading and understanding a basic definition.>you're a fucking idiot.Ironic.
cant believe there are people still arguing with the delusional clown coping about liszt looking like a ladyboy.
Mozart is cool
>>122793510If a man has the physical characteristics of a woman, then he has feminine characteristics. You are such a fucking idiot it's astounding.Or please explain how your description of Liszt makes any sense at all. His sex is not indeterminate, anyone can see that he is a man.
>>122794785>If a man has the physical characteristics of a woman, then he has feminine characteristicsI didn't say he is feminine you fucking idiot.
>>122776564Arvo Pärt - Vater Unserhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9Xm_nR4310
>>122777087I heard she sometimes fucks members of the orchestra she's playing with on tour
>he [wagner] wrote ironically to Wolzogen about the various tragedies: of Schumann, to have possessed no melodies, of Rossini, to have had no school, of Brahms, to be a bore, etc.So sad Schumann has no melodies.
>>122795635 am singing Schumann's melodies often, in my head or just humming. Schumann was probably the greatest Romantic next to Chopin
Sad Schumann has sad melodiesHappy Schymann has happy melodies
>>122795914Schumann is at first happy, but then sad because he remembers he doesn't have any melodies.
let's start the day with Mendelssohn's The Hebrides, op. 26 (Fingal's Cave) (Dohnanyi / VPO)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5UVcK73VFU&list=OLAK5uy_nsssqQaY08dPxK3RoLU3e8TaJ59CXVGjs&index=36
Is there any major autist composer that wrote in a baroque contrapunctal style with baroque instrumentation after the baroque period ended?Bonus points if its from a time that wasnt particularly kind to itMax points if its someone other than Bach
>>122796593Yes, me.
>>122783807
.
>>122793090basedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyG2WUkylH8
>>122797135Magnificent Mahler 3, definitely one of my favorites now.>>122796593Not quite what you're looking for but check out this Mahler Bach suite arrangement in the recording I just quoted/posted above:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVSGHPZcl-Y&list=OLAK5uy_lZFCJJTHWpQCR7Yz2eX-w4jOe8q3dgOj4&index=7
Holsthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54cV4vN9dSU&list=OLAK5uy_kIidsnWjQI97VcNxaPUuNVx_F6mT5lwD8
now playingstart of Tchaikovsky - Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 35, TH 59:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSjCnT7xIFk&list=OLAK5uy_nyoGy4wgoYuyEowu6IhC-Q9h4tfNTvejI&index=2start of Mendelssohn - Violin Concerto in E Minor, Op. 64, MWV O 14:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLCRgpMfjcI&list=OLAK5uy_nyoGy4wgoYuyEowu6IhC-Q9h4tfNTvejI&index=5https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_nyoGy4wgoYuyEowu6IhC-Q9h4tfNTvejI
now playing (links to the ones I plan to listening off this release right now because it contains a whole lot more, including Also sprach Zarathustra, op. 30, Eine Alpensinfonie, Op. 64, and many more great works worth listening to)Macbeth, Op. 23, TrV 163 (Dorati / Detroit SO):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUNSOZW5x_k&list=OLAK5uy_k8zcAAi-18yrznydqPJJvgHU1Fhd52BWo&index=38Tod und Verklärung, Op. 24, TrV 158 (Blomstedt / San Francisco Symphony):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336kwP6c4wA&list=OLAK5uy_k8zcAAi-18yrznydqPJJvgHU1Fhd52BWo&index=39Metamorphosen for 23 Solo Strings, TrV 290 (Blomstedt / San Francisco Symphony):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOsV9ShcPXY&list=OLAK5uy_k8zcAAi-18yrznydqPJJvgHU1Fhd52BWo&index=40 Don Quixote, Op. 35, TrV 184 (Heinrich Shiff / Dietmar Hallman / Masur / Gewandhaus):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ill8NBRbx4&list=OLAK5uy_k8zcAAi-18yrznydqPJJvgHU1Fhd52BWo&index=41https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_k8zcAAi-18yrznydqPJJvgHU1Fhd52BWo
>>122799735Is it me or are these recordings very quiet? I can't hear anything without turning up the volume.
>>122799735Hmm I'm playing them at the same volume I was just listening to >>122799247 this one with, maybe a click or two more. I know there are a lot of quiet parts in the op. 23 and op. 24 lol.
>>122799735Oh fug, forget to put 'start of Don Quixote*,' because that one is split into 14 different tracks but all of the links are part of a playlist so if you click to go to YouTube itself it'll play through the rest on that one, or any of them, really.
>>122799914Yeah, Tod und Verklärung, for example, just sounds quiet until it gets to the 5 minute mark lol. Or is it still an issue?
>>122799959I tried other recordings of Op. 24. The first five to six minutes are very quiet, but the ones by Celibidache and Szell with the Cleveland Orchestra are a bit more audible. Abbado and Böhm also opt for a quieter intro, but the latter has some coughing in the background.
>>122800088If you wanna try another recording, Karajan / BPO is the usual reference one:Metamorphosen, TrV 290:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awLkK-9lTBg&list=OLAK5uy_lxa4wtOJPsaxBlBFrDF74MbUJGHsX9tqE&index=2Tod und Verklärung Op. 24:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8y5rXtirjA&list=OLAK5uy_lxa4wtOJPsaxBlBFrDF74MbUJGHsX9tqE&index=3https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_lxa4wtOJPsaxBlBFrDF74MbUJGHsX9tqEand here's another set with even more Strauss recordings of his:https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kbjmIf4ANEDooR3f2MjCksKx7f1sKuT-Q (if you remove the 'music.' from the url it'll take you to the playlist on YouTube like I otherwise link)With that said, I think these Blomstedt ones and the others on this collected set of various recordings from different sources is still very good.
i find it very hard to care for strauss, especially at his most formally ephemeral and shapeless (the tone poems)
>>122801099Maybe your sense of music shouldn't depend on formal shape. Maybe it should depend on the inherent characteristics of music, like melody and rhythm.
>>122801504if i were so concerned with purely melody and rhythm, i’d be a rockist. the defining characteristic of classical music is its written nature allowing it to project long form structures and incorporate precise and detailed voice leading that popular music cannot possibly coordinate. why even bother with classical music if all you care about is surface level sensuality?
>>122801504>>122801773also, very funny to presume that the “inherent characteristics of music” exclude form and structure.
>>122801773>if i were so concerned with purely melody and rhythm, i’d be a rockist.Then you're a fucking idiot with no comprehension of melody and rhythm. If you think the only thing that separates rock from classical is intellectual complicatedness, rather than FEELING, then you're no better than rockists, since it doesn't take much intellect to understand sonata form, but to be truly affected by high art is the sign of a high mind.
>>122802458>the only thing that separates rock from classical is intellectual complicatednessIt is, tho."Classical" is called formal music because it's backed by a formal theory, while popular/vernacular music like rock is derived from folk music, which doesn't require and predates music theory.
I thought rockist was a word used by Beyonce fans to describe Bruce Springsteen fans.
>Sergei Rachmaninoff said, "Hofmann is still sky high ... the greatest pianist alive if he is sober and in form. Otherwise, it is impossible to recognize the Hofmann of old".>By his own admission, Sergei Rachmaninoff, in his 40s, prepared for a career as a concert pianist by practicing over 15 hours a day with the goal of attaining the level of Hofmann's technique.Was Hofmann the greatest pianist who's ever lived?Definitely the greatest recorded pianist
>>122802458if you think any of what i described is mere “intellectual complicatedness” and that form and structure have no implication on what you so naively describe as “FEELING” (lmao) then you are obviously a tourist.
>>122802501There is a lot of Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, etc. that are inspired by folk music tho
>Schubert>Schuman >Schubert>Schuman >Schubert>Schuman >Schuman>SchubertIt's all too confusing sisters
>>122803046Schumannbert
>>122802749Sometimes I think that the old golden age pianists were so revered because of their limited repetoire. You hear that famous story of Hofmann refusing to learn Rachmaninoff's 3rd because it had "too many notes." His standards were too high. He wouldn't introduce anything to his repertoire unless he could reach the threshold of what he considered acceptable. Lhevvine spent 10 years practicing Chopin's Op.10/6 before performing it in public. Pianists of the present are expected to play everything, and play it they do, with arguably greater technical finesse than ever. But the broad spectrum of repetoire they ecompass comes with a lesser approach. A generic one.
>>122803025it’s almost like what separates them from folk music is their application of folk melodies in classical structures and formal contexts.
Can someone recommend a Brahms 1 that has the sensitivity of Sokolov's but not the messiness?
np, another dope cover>>122803315Katchen, first part of a playlist for the whole thing:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5ORMiGoxEk&list=OLAK5uy_lO8GqjavV-zFsyS90t8I9NBDLgcxPELiM&index=14orUgorski:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGxho-K8kts&list=OLAK5uy_kwP9EG55J_CHUl2X-NZH362U1nQ83wbQM&index=1orVirsaladzehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_8uuNuJroc
>>122803315https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vicZhH4r1chttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8J7UZv9JH28https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeFJ3z3oBs4
Ravelhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bh4-Z7wGfU&list=OLAK5uy_lQpVEmf4fdlvtX6D_VEQRbbd0Cb0pwuYM
now playingstart of Beach - Piano Quintet in F-Sharp Minor, Op. 67:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1A2yijITPR4&list=OLAK5uy_kc8qA28TuTsy0wLwksriXsf5KdkHxW9lU&index=2start of Elgar - Piano Quintet, Op. 84:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WIF0UxJBQg&list=OLAK5uy_kc8qA28TuTsy0wLwksriXsf5KdkHxW9lU&index=5https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kc8qA28TuTsy0wLwksriXsf5KdkHxW9lU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z_Ee3E3C0QWow, never heard this Ravel piece before. It's pretty different from a lot of his other stuff.
>>122805384that poor cello...
>>122805384very Bartok
>>122805384https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrWCpPyI5pA&ab_channel=%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%9D%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD
>>122802501>"Classical" is called formal music because it's backed by a formal theory,And no one gives a shit about contemporary formal music, because it's not classical music, it's just autistic academics using formalism without any artistic capability or intelligence.>>122802777Obviously form and structure have an 'implication' on feeling, never said it didn't. But for you to be incapable to see what sets apart a Beethoven melody from a Beetles melody undoubtedly makes you a fucking idiot. You can argue all you want, run around in circles, but this is undeniable: you lack artistic sensitivity.
>>122778826Is there anyone who dislikes Sviatoslav?
Richard Strauss is the greatest composer of the 20th century.
>>122792688If they had good conducting it might at least be worth attending.
Hurwitz has competition.
>>122776564How do you guys avoid /classical/ fatigue? I've listened to 2 3 hour operas, an oratorio and now some Mendelsohn string quartets and its all just sounds at this point.
Bach's organ trio sonatas are peak music
>>122808104Take a break. Don't listen to music for a day or two, maybe even more.
>>122808157I think it's just because I like listening to loads of new music at once. When I hear it again it'll click more
>>122807886Interestingly, I think while he's solidly like third-tier, he might be the most universally likeable.
>>122808185>>122808104Alternative between pieces you're familiar with and new ones, that's what I do.
>>122808459Whos better, strauss or strauss?
new>>122809004>>122809004>>122809004
>>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. if beethoven were alive in the 1960s and used a beatles melody 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
