Hubert Parry editionhttps://youtu.be/UA3Uz5Let6UThis thread is for the discussion of music in the Western (European) classical tradition, as well as classical instrument-playing.>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://rentry.org/classicalgenPrevious: >>129401082
>>129416248Barenboim copy cats some aspects of Furt's conducting style and interpretation but, especially outside of that first Chicago cycle, Barenboim got more and more soft, focusing on a heavy legato sound and a slower approach to tempo on the whole. Not to mention the parts that he does copy Furtwangler in seem to me to be rather forced and at odds with the rest of the conception since they're not part of a greater conception of the work.
The III7 chordhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9v2mIUb-MdIIt feels rather neglected.
Reinckenhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBP717ZWsuo&list=OLAK5uy_mK3JoH8lgew5D_1ATWyIgNkBWrexwO-5w
do not start this shit again in the new thread
Current listening tohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Iu1pA4sDbc&list=RD-Iu1pA4sDbc
Busch's Beethoven. Peak.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEh2vFxde0I&list=OLAK5uy_lOYcWs0T12cfuIMMmUnLMi3vbp7hpXREQ&index=12
>>129416540Yeah, you should only watch videos that were uploaded at least 200 years ago so that there was time for a critical consensus to form.
>>129416547We prefer to keep ourselves free of any youtubeslop here. And waiting for critical consensus to form is more of a norseslop move for OGNB which I'm against.
My transdaughter enjoys Scriabin lately.
>>129417510We prefer Medtner here.
My gay ass dad keeps connecting to my Bluetooth speaker to play his shitty piano music. He thinks it's funny to make me listen to some dinosaur music ughhhh
>>129417555You don't even listen to Medtner lad.
Its a Residents kind of night. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IKOLRPpLKw
>>129418069why did you put the images in the wrong order
>>129417510>>129417571I wonder who this poster could be
>>129418069Back to back 10's, Glenny G is always on top.
>>129418094Cause the 81 is better
>>129418159Agreed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb6ut1qRRa4Much better than that hack Pavarotti.
Orchestrated versions of op. 133 are dogshit, Furtwrangler especially is unlistenable. Back to Takacs.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nys-CUQQS8E
>>129416314>especially outside of that first Chicago cycle, Barenboim got more and more soft, focusing on a heavy legato sound and a slower approach to tempo on the whole.His most recent Staatskapelle Berlin cycle is his fastest!
>>129418267But have you considered,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0Zntl1WY84&list=OLAK5uy_nfomepzayYR1334jMNjQ5demhw2ujmJU0&index=128
>>129418544>20 (twenty) whole fucking minutesNo, I don't think I have or will.
>>129418558But it's the K-God...
>>129418569This is sappy and sentimental schlock. Where is the drive and aggression? This... SUCKS!
>>129418558>>129418583Fine, we've heard your input. Try our newest version, v.2.0.klempererhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee5uDKWeC_I&list=OLAK5uy_mUvYoBe1jot4fGRs0Uj-Yc_TaQgzrPEvQ&index=1
it's time
>>129418593I listened to Klemperer before this, its mid. The recording quality is very distant and thin with a weak bass, and his interpretation is milquetoast. I don't see any benefit to the orchestra and these conductors/recordings are garbagio for grandpas. Only Takacs is real.
SCENE[the Hero, Daniel Barenboim, enters]
>>129418626>>129418662Fuck off gay spammer.
>>129418651Fair enough. Well, when you have the time and inclination, here's two morehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjiaX1a2KLE&list=OLAK5uy_kJeC7i_BZIu8l25vdSp-tZKlOzT1kTViM&index=28https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0YI4C8K7W8&list=OLAK5uy_nDIaMTByuMvJo2Ycv3R4ZtJGSeQqbM-G4&index=4I won't post anymore after that. Can't go wrong with Takacs, tru
>>129418683The Swarowsky was nice, best of any of the orchestrated versions I've listened to. Shame the sound quality is so lackluster, if it was decent I would consider keeping it around. Couldn't find any information about it at all online really, but I'll stake my mark that its much better than Klemperer, Furtwrangler, or Karajan.
>>129418979My efforts were not entirely fruitless then :)
>>129418626>>129418662okay I just finished the first act so lemme say a few things,1) I should have gotten into opera a long time ago, wow, this is sublime2) I still stand by that you can enjoy the music of opera solely on its own, but I now admit knowing and following along with the plot and libretto adds a whole additional dimension3) My heart, soul, and ears almost exploded from beauty by the end of that act when Siegmund and Sieglinde were doing their duet
>>129418502The timings don't really tell the full story. I should be specific: his approach to rubato has become less and less flexible over time so the overall approach feels slower to my ear at least.
Schoenberghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGuBxUr2qaI&list=OLAK5uy_n9W5GrHqSOorLnpUmah4lZCLoX2DT0Suw&index=1
>Asked what he thought of Walter’s renditions of Mahler, Otto Klemperer quipped, “Too Jewish for me.”What does this mean?
>>129420401as if Mahler could get any more Jewish
Im a newfriend when it comes to classical, do you guys got anything else like this? Its kind of atonal but hasn't completely gone off the deep endhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYKl41e_hoU
>>129420461other late Liszt, including the third book of his Annees de pelerinageyou might like the pieces on this too >>129420098
>>129420461Enescuhttps://youtu.be/VUDMWEzZ9qUEarly Berg, Schoenberghttps://youtu.be/aqE5By_69OYhttps://youtu.be/VeTFxbsVGrIDebussyhttps://youtu.be/CEJfSGJm41UJanacekhttps://youtu.be/IOhjDbJV_FgBartokhttps://youtu.be/6rs3jAEG6VcMore late Liszt.Années (especially final volume)https://youtube.com/watch?v=5tJRPRrfIpQTrauergondelhttps://youtube.com/watch?v=axhKyU6amY8Die Zelle im Nonnenwerthhttps://youtube.com/watch?v=fMGF_yFVlAcVia Crucishttps://youtube.com/watch?v=4oIRFN2vuRU
>>129420461The piano music of Toru Takemitsu sounds like it'd be right up your alley.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-_Owwi67oc&list=OLAK5uy_kb1FhR0VsuQAOHHZp0MJY5EZ0F_9khhs4&index=1
>>129420514>>129420485>>129420524Thanks, ill give these all a listen
note to self: listen to Mompou's piano music and the etudes of Philip Glass the end of the weekendhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIxy3BhyUd4&list=OLAK5uy_nJpZ_Y47kqwrNZvzdIeJ227T0_ctushSA&index=5https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD8hprh6D7E&list=OLAK5uy_mcIBG0gdbZrqSJJdGzKh-CRepVk3X1eqU&index=10>>129420461you might like these two as well
>>129420461If you're new, it's likely you don't have proper sense of tonality at all, you just want novelty. Stop jerking around and start with the classics, Beethoven sonatas, symphonies or quartets (e.g pathetique, 3rd symphony 'eroica' or quartet no.11)Once you have grasped those, come back for more.
>>129420545Ive been listening to popular music all my life, isn't that tonality? I basically think of it as what tone you think the song would end on but these Schoenburg wizards are trying to make it as hard as possible.
>>129420545it's 2026, anonSTART with GLASS and SCHOENBERGSTART with DELEUZE and BAUDRILLARDSTART with FRANCIS BACON and DE KOONINGSTART with BRAKHAGE and BELA TARRSTART with PRYNNE and ASHBERYSTART with PYNCHON and VOLLMAN
>>129420583>start with the 20th centuryaren't we supposed to hate this shit by now? we're at a greater remove from Schoenberg and Joyce than they were from Brahms and Alfred Lord Tennyson. go back to your hundred year old avant-garde, old man
>>129420622hmm okay you wanna play like that?START with THOMAS ADES and SCHNITTKESTART with HABERMAS and SLOTERDIJK START with um...START with LYNCH and WEERASETHAKUL START with BERRYMAN and LARKINSTART with BOLANO and GADDIShappy?
>>129420669my point is more than the 19th century had barely begun before Wordsworth was kicking the Augustan Age's ass and likewise with the early 20th century yet here we are in 2026 still upholding the moral and aesthetic tradition of the old century
>>129420691Because we're all still modernists.
>>129420578Popular music is the mockery of tonality. It lacks proper voice leading(and thus counterpoint), rarely modulates (especially to remote keys), does not create a long-scale narrative (variations, development, macro tension/resolution, climaxes), instead it focuses on instant gratification and relies on cliché disguised in sloppy inxpressive timbres/sound effects, it severely lacks variety.Do yourself a favor and quit listening to garbage, start with Beethoven and/or Chopin, whichever floats your boat. Any person who click with classical music will necessarily prefer it to other forms of music.
>>129420724that's an arbitrary construct used to vindicate certain artistic axioms that emerged from an authentic poetical spirit chafing against old conventions, but which have now hardened into prejudices, just as in previous ages.
>>129420736I meant even though Joyce and Schoenberg and Eliot are a hundred years old, they still seem fresh, if not outright contemporary to us.
heard the junkies and tweekers at the bus stop humming Berg lieder this morning
>>129420731Don't listen to this guy, classical music was on the way out by the time of Beethoven and Chopin. Listen to Palestrina and ars subtilior music, after that era music got dumbed down in complexity.
>>129420760no they don't lol. i grew up reading this stuff too, Eliot, DeLillo, Pynchon, Joyce, God forbid Larkin, who inherits modernism's prejudices and none of its vision. i'm bored to death of it and much of it just smells of the lecture hall to me now, which i imagine is how reading the Victorians felt to Eliot. Milton is fresher and more vivid to me than anything by Larkin.
>>129420806Pynchon is literally still writing!>Love Again, by Philip Larkin"Love again: wanking at ten past three (Surely he’s taken her home by now?), The bedroom hot as a bakery,The drink gone dead, without showing how To meet tomorrow, and afterwards,And the usual pain, like dysentery.Someone else feeling her breasts and cunt, Someone else drowned in that lash-wide stare, And me supposed to be ignorant,Or find it funny, or not to care,Even ... but why put it into words?Isolate rather this elementThat spreads through other lives like a tree And sways them on in a sort of sense And say why it never worked for me. Something to do with violenceA long way back, and wrong rewards, And arrogant eternity."You think this reads as outdated? Especially compared to Milton? Alright then. Agree to disagree I suppose.
feels like a Beethoven's Missa Solemnis nighthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=za0q5y9_NLE&list=OLAK5uy_nZzdz2glVb2VeUv37lTy0yNa5_2Itmo-E&index=1
>>129420797>after that era music got dumbed down in complexity.Lol. Exact opposite, you dimwit. Palestrina isn't even "tonal" in functional harmonic sense, it's modal.
>>129420806>t. hasn't read Bleeding Edge or Shadow Ticket yet
is shostakovich gonna have 2 choke-a-bitch?
>>129420837Tonality is a trap that later composers fell into. Ars subtilior composers were doing wayyyy more interesting things with rhythm than pretty much any composer until hundreds of years later.
>>129420904Tonality is a common sense that music concluded with, the force that drives architecture not theough rhetoric alone (like renaissance music), but by purely harmonic means. This allows true complexity to flourish. Furthermore, instrumentation (specifically orchestras, chamber music and pianos) allowed for the said complexity to be pushed to its absolute limits with dynamics, expressiveness and combined rhetorical devices - that is why some consider Wagner as the peak of music which he might as well be.>Ars subtilior composers were doing wayyyy more interesting things with rhythmI laughed. You did too.
>>129420931This blows Wagner out of the waterhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_rH2a-rg6Y
>>129420950It's alright. Just not even a hundredth of Wagner.Renaissance music is perfect for studying counterpoint, it has all the notational puzzles. For listening, there's a seperate branch of baroque, or the more intellectual classical/romantic periods. You must've deluded yourself into thinking otherwise. This is what a desk inside four walls 24/7 does to a man, touch grass.
anyone plan on giving their child a music related middle name, or heaven willing, first name? anything from Mozart to Siegfried to Johannes to Strauss to Gustav to Byrd to Schumann to Figaro to whatever.
>>129421071I plan on not having a child, ever.
>>129421082Acceptable if you are or are planning to be an artist. If so, based. If not, scum.
How's that Rozhdestvensky Bruckner cycle?
any other /classical/ approved Youtube shorts???https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gaDv0h91Vxghttps://www.youtube.com/shorts/4u4E0NvyAY0
>>129421091Artist? For myself only, I don't publish my exercises nor do I want to entertain anyone. Unless an artist has something better than Beethoven to offer, he should stay quiet.
>>129416250>Hubert Parry editionI've only heard his symphonies. How's his other music?
>>129421170His vocal work is great. Try the choral piece in the OP.
now playing, in honor of the thread editionstart of Parry: Symphony No. 1 in G Majorhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMkfH_ELCHc&list=OLAK5uy_kpd7SapUgNJf5YexGejM5UIgb-ZEtUWZY&index=2Parry: Symphonic Variationshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIecM94RhE8&list=OLAK5uy_kpd7SapUgNJf5YexGejM5UIgb-ZEtUWZY&index=6start of Parry: Symphony No. 2 in F Major, "The Cambridge"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KmhoYjaj-A&list=OLAK5uy_kpd7SapUgNJf5YexGejM5UIgb-ZEtUWZY&index=7start of Parry: Symphony No. 3 in C Major, "The English"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctp_NuG_39k&list=OLAK5uy_kpd7SapUgNJf5YexGejM5UIgb-ZEtUWZY&index=10https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kpd7SapUgNJf5YexGejM5UIgb-ZEtUWZY
>>129416250what's going on in this image anyway?
>>129421176It's lovely, thanks. Def. gonna explore the rest of his.
>>129420950Explain what makes it better than Wagner
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but are singers (opera, lieder, choral, whatever) fluent in the languages they sing or they just learn the lyrics for the work?
>>129420461Maybe late Scriabinhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MApCm3UO6nQ
The Five Greatest Scriabin Pianists>Vladimir Sofronitzky>Sviatoslav Richter>Vladimir Horowitz>Vladimir Ashkenazy>Yevgeny SudbinWELL WELL WELL
>>129421396Hurwitz sweetie you forgot the Lettberg again. It's time to get back to the disciplinary chamber.
>>129421396Pretty damn hard to dispute. I'd be more interested in the next five. That's where differing, intriguing opinions come in.
top 10 piano sonatasbeethoven 32beethoven 29beethoven 23schubert 21scriabin 5prokofiev 8liszt in b minorchopin 2schumann 3mozart 14beethoven probably deserves more slots but that'd be boring, so i'll limit it to 3 and say sorry 30, 31, 26, 21, and 28!
>>129421444>no chopin 3>no beethoven 30>all that insteadYou missed two of the greatest sonatas that anyone ever conceived of. Pointless list I'm afraid.
>>129421444Beethoven 30 erasure. 15 is also Mozart's best actual sonata. Limit to one per composer, that'd be more interesting to see.
>>129421444>no Scarlatti 394
These lists are pretty dumb desu. If Scarlatti and (late) Scriabin sonatas are "sonatas", then so are Chopin's ballades.There's no point in going after just titles alone. Either you stick to the sonata-form-based piano works (which excludes Scarlatti for obvious reasons, and most of Scriabin because they don't function as sonata-forms harmonically(a necessity)), classical 2-3-4 movement piano works, or just include any keyboard work.
>>129421549is just for fun, and spur discussion
Is it just me or is there something kitsch about some of Glass' etudes? like check this out,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0ETTKwbibUSounds like it's from an anime.
>>129421314Most of them just learn the lyrics. They usually take special training for correct pronounciation, though results vary.
I saw in a TV show one character asked another,>Are you a music fan?and the other replied,>Sure, as much as the next guy. Yo-Yo Ma, [other names]I feel like saying Yo-Yo Ma here is incredibly suspicious. Like, if you're into classical, you'd name the composers, right? So someone who just says Yo-Yo Ma inspires the image of either a guy who just buys a random "Best of Yo-Yo Ma!" CD from Walmart, or the only time they've ever listened to music is when they went on a date or company function to go see Yo-Yo Ma perform, in which scenario they had no idea about any of the composers or the music beyond that moment. Disgusting.
>>129421651I see. Which is how you can end up with "X-singer's French/German is off" scenarios. Thank you.
What's the best Tristan und Isolde with a traditional staging?
>>129421671It would have been fine if he had said Casals or Rostropovich or someone else who's actually noteworthy.
>Are you a music fan, anon?>Sure. Yuja Wang, Jon Lisiecki, Glenn Gould.>O_o>What?
>>129421696Exactly, you get my point. Whereas Yo-Yo Ma, fine as cellist as he is, as an answer suggests a man who types "2 hours of most relaxing cello classical" into youtube and listens through it while doing paperwork.
>>129421671You a classical reference on tv shows multiple times this year. Do you just watch a lot or is it a coincidence? I rarely come across classical references, but I don't watch shows/movies anymore either.Assuming you're Mahlerkun, who should be asleep lol
>>129421706>You a-came across*
>>129421706I have a pretty bad on/off TV addiction, yeah. And just getting some final thoughts out :) I'll lay down soon and be asleep before this Shostakovich recording is over.
>You a music fan, kitty?>ARRAUW!!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tf2wqybFxYE
There is not a single decent recording of the polonaise-fantaisie op.61. Only Cortot's is tolerable. I know it is a masterpiece, it sounds good in my mind, but every interpretation is flawed. Most of them are intolerably slow, I can't listen to Richter's anymore for example. It shouldn't be longer than 10 minutes
>>129421931Imagine spending your life screeching about one single interpreter because you wanted an immense load of youtube shite. Very sad stuff to watch.
>>129421955imagine spending your life shitposting on and trolling /classical/ after getting bored of metaI
>>129422019imagine spending 16 years listening to metal like you lol.
Imagine there's no HeavenIt's easy if you try
>>129421444Dreadful list, anytime I see some plebeian include Mozart and not Clementi or Haydn or even having Liszt at all I already know they are just regurgitating what others have told them.Actual list:Haydn Hob. 49Clementi Op. 40 no. 2HammerklavierAppassionata Beethoven Op. 32Godowsky SonataAlkan Grande SonataNight WindMedtner Sonata in F MinorFeinberg 3rdIf I had more room it would include more early Beethoven.
>>129422038Life isn't a competition to see who can be the most contrarian, you know?
>>129422024>>129422038excellent posts metalschizo
>>129422043Nothing about my list is contrarian. How can you call a list with Beethoven and Haydn contrarian?If you traveled back in time to Mozart's day and asked people if he or Clementi had better sonatas, no one would have said Mozart. At the least you would have to think they are equals, and yet people only put Mozart on sonata lists, never Clementi, usually never Haydn either. Its all perception of the "genius" Mozart who died so early, its all forced story narratives put upon the unthinking masses by historians.Reminder that the Mona Lisa is unfinished, missing layers of coloring, and doesn't even have her eyebrows.
>>129422068>i don't hear it, therefore you lie!you understand less about art than my cat, it figures you like metal LOL
>>129422137Never once in either post did I say or imply anything about lying. Who are you talking to? Voices in your head?
>>129422143>its all forced story narratives put upon the unthinking masses by historians.never once were you honest, but at least here you're just being stupid. surely, the /metal/poster knows better than historians, musicologists or us listeners. LOL
>>129422162Before I reply to this, you are norsebot changing your grammar again, correct?
Actually who am I kidding, as if I really need to ask if some moron typing "LOL LOL /metal/poster LOL LOL" is norsepleb.>>129422162It is a forced story narrative, which in itself is not lying to people. I consider a lie to be an intentional misleading of others for a nefarious purpose, afterall, if you believed that there was a god and told people it existed, it would not be lying to do so, even if that god never actually existed, the lie would only be so if you knew it never existed by told people the opposite. So long as the person believes it to be true, it is not a lie. >us listenerIt is more than than a bit comedic to watch you cling to groups like this. Considering you've only been here for a year and meanwhile spent "16 years listening to metal". Also why do you constantly change your grammar and pretend to be other people? Does your own metal listening reputation scare you? Its more than ironic that you'll speak about what is "honest" and yet constantly pull stunts like these.
Anyways, whats actually contrarian is having any Prokofiev sonata on a list at all. I would put literally any Beethoven from No 1 to 32 over anything he wrote, same with any Medtner sonat, I would even take Rach's 2nd over anything he wrote. Completely second rate unless playing ironic carnival melodies and then smashing the keys as hard as possible right afterwards really gets you off. Couldn't compose a genuine feeling to save his life. Zero percent chance I would ever listen to a Prok sonata over any great classical sonata. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--4b9rCf7fc&list=OLAK5uy_lGF3AaJUW69YdWRnNuGa8Ye-Yu4Dm16MY&index=1
>>129422216So why is it forced, how did Mozart fool so many people into believing his music sounds good?>Considering you've only been here for a year >pretend to be other people?how about take it to >>>/soc/ >>>/metal/ schizosister?
>>129422261Mozart has great concertos and symphonies, and people allowed their thoughts on those leak into his sonatas that are not of the same quality. Just like Liszt has interesting harmony and orchestration giving him a lot of influence to those around him, and then people confuse this to mean his actual pieces were well written. What happens often times is that fame is given to a composer, and then a mythos is began as the "objective" quality of fame is thought to equal quality, and this is then simply applied wholesale to every aspect of the composer. Fans especially will slather this over all aspects of what they like, regardless of validity. You would know this first hand from pretending Chopin has any business in the discussions of counterpoint or form. Cue the hysteria. Now the jig is up you return back to normal grammar, you really are one dishonest lying fraud. Although at least you did not further embarrass yourself by continuing to pretend to be someone else again.
>>129422302>allowed their thoughts on those leak into his sonatas that are not of the same quality.Nonsensical metal-tier drivel.>and then people confuse this to mean his actual pieces were well written.There is no such confusion, many of the Liszt's pieces are thoughtfully and well written. Perhaps the confusion comes in the ears of metalschizophrenic.Chopin's counterpoint can be criticized on the ground that it was not employed in any real strict-contrapuntal forms, you're regurgitating garbage due to your own ineptitude. You don't even understand 'form', what are you even trying to 'criticize'? Being a loud charlatan is embarrassing.Chopin can be and should be criticized for writing solely for the piano, not something he executed perfectly fine >normal grammarschizophrenia.
>>129422357>many of the Liszt's pieces are thoughtfully and well written.And yet here you are stating him to be trash:https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/125448793/#125464160You're not very interesting to speak with these days, I mean you were always kind of limited because of your empirical mindset, but yeah not very fun to talk with someone who has no real opinions besides whatever he hopes will help him win an argument, even if it means directly contradicting himself and his previous statements.
Nor was that a one off comment either, you have quite the history of calling Liszt trash or garbage.
It is an open secret that Liszt sucks.
>>129422396Correct.
>>129422383mentally deranged indeed.
>>129421396>Anyways, heres some shitty eceleb opinion from a man who can't even keep his body weight in checkAs if anyone should care at all.
The only thing more estrogenized than Chopin is owning a cat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blv68RnW1YI
>>129421549It's not that deep, bro.
>>129422038>Clementi>jewish virtuoso romantislop>TWO Medtner sonatas>(((Feinberg)))Thanks for the laughs, contrarianfag retard. I couldn't make a worse list even if I tried!
>>129422621>virtuoso romantislopNever insult the Hammerklavier like that again.
>>129422624I said JEWISH virtuoso romantislop, anon. Please learn how to read.
>>129422545>Anyway, here's my stupid post about nothing because I have no personality or opinions of my ownWhy should I care about your post at all?
>>129422649>I must defend the honor of my beloved ecelebWhat makes a normalfag do this? You know that fat son of a whore doesn't even know you exist, right?
>>129416250Best Sibelius Violin Concerto recording?
>>129422659I'm not defending anyone, though. This is about your post. Why is your reading comprehension so shit, anon? Why do you assume things and embarrass yourself over and over again?
>>129422633Jews are beloved and respected here. Maybe the goy romantics like Schumann and Chopin should have focused up on their studies so they could write like Alkan. Schumann's "Concerto for piano without orchestra" doesn't even sound like a concerto and certainly loses the plot multiple times. And Chopin's actual concerto WITH orchestra sounds more like solo piano than Alkan's concerto.
>>129422671>I'm not defending anyoneAbout as honest as Norsepleb changing his grammar and pretending to be someone else until he gets exposed.
>>129422681I don't know what that is but good for you I guess.
>>129422685>I don't know what that isAbout as honest as you pretending you were defending your eceleb.
>>129422672
>>129422687But I wasn't pretending to defend anything, anon. You seem to be hopelessly scrambling here. Calm down and take a deep breath.
>>129422688Problem?
>Problem?
>>129422691You were pretending not to, I missed adding the "n't" to "were". I'm not really checking my posts since this conversation is a waste of time with you pretending to not be doing or believing things you do.
Also I was debating putting more Medtner on there, along with early Beethoven that would be the next thing added tbqh. Technically Alkan's Symphony for Solo Piano is really a piano sonata, since a transcribed symphony to solo instrument would just be a sonata, same with his Concerto. In which case that Symphony would be on the list instead of the Grande Sonata. I think I would have to kick off something for the Concerto as well, probably Clementi, although I do love that piece. Regardless I kept them off, if only because of the titles.
Sad to see this general devolve into a schizophrenic loser's personal blog. This was the only thread I still regulary posted in. Sad to see it go but maybe it's for the best.
>>129422832See you tomorrow lass.
>>129422832Anon... :(
I'm leaving too, composers like Chopin and interpreters like Cortot don't even know advanced maths such as fourier series. Music is unworthy of my time. I must return to my deep studies in second year engineering...
What does this mean anyway? Is it just some words that sound good? Is it similar to stuff like "Hark"?
Boulezhttps://youtu.be/HhcZM7cFy_c
So we're all gonna listen to or even watch Tristan und Isolde today, ye?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8FMM0Y71Ak&list=OLAK5uy_nAfCOtCWDG_H8QLarlEcS-2IuL4GqUHb0&index=6
>>129423719I'd prefer not to.
vday piano musichttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9DECFy-ZrE&list=OLAK5uy_m2-f7JZZnKmSr-sQN3N6F5kCmGTJGnvfs&index=1
>>129423719Oh, I've watched that performance. It was decent, but honestly I haven't seen many performances so can't say for sure.
Being a head production designer of operas sounds like one of the most fun, creative, and interesting jobs on the planet.
>>129423777RT has that performance and Barenboim's older one from 1973 with the Bayreuth Festival Orchestra and Rene Kollo. Debated on which one to try, but figure since I've been enjoying the La Scala Barenboim Ring, I might as well be consistent and try the Tristan from the same production. Plus, y'know, updated views on the music and all. Anyway, should be good! ClassicsToday has a review of it and they rate it an 8/10 Artistic Quality, 10/10 Sound Quality, list it as a reference recording, and have this to say,>Is this the “best” DVD version of this opera? Well, it depends on your tolerance for poor singing from Isolde. Production, conducting, look and feel, picture and sound are all magnificent, and all of the other singing is close to first rate. Meier has a great following of knowledgeable fans; I am not among them. So be warned: this is very satisfying in all but one very important way. But make sure you also own the Nilsson/Vickers.aka, can't go wrong!
>>129423777>>1294238671983*, not 1973
kino
>Couldn't use the practice rooms yesterday because they were all in use>Peaked inside>Two people were just browsing their phones>Another was using the room to shoot a tiktok video
>>129424137Which scene/vid is this?>>129424239Is mayonnaise an instrument?
What production of the Ring Cycle should I watch?
>>129424308>Which scene/vid is this?the ending of Barenboim's La Scale production of Wagner's Die Walkure>>129424311I'm really enjoying this one so far (just finished Die Walkure) and it's on RT. I also downloaded Levine's, but while I haven't watched it, I did take a look at the file and the video quality isn't great compared to the Barenboim one -- of course, Levine's Ring is great musically, but so is Barenboim's. I will say Barenboim's has darker, grounded, more modern production, and Levine's is more high fantasy, with detailed costumes and bright colors. I'd decide based on that. Again though, I wholeheartedly recommend pic.
>>129424308>>129424333La Scala*, not La Scale
>>129424333>and it's on RT.Ive been searching Russia Today but can't see it. Can I get a direct link?
>>129424361he meant Rooster Teeth
>>129424361Not sure if direct linking to RT is allowed here, but just literally type,>rutracker barenboim Der Ring des Nibelungeninto Google and it'll be the first link or so.
>>129424380Thanks
>>129424386No problem, hope you enjoy it as much as I have been so far!
>you are listening to Rach symphony 2 and Tchaikovsky 6 on Valentine's Day, right, anon? a-anon...???https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr2efMmbQA8https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHO2Wr9yQeQtheir piano concertos would probably be good too + piano trios + Rachmaninoff cello sonatas + Tchaikovksy's violin concertonow that's a V-Day program
>>129424333>>129424391While I do trust this is a good version, would you really recommend this over say Solti or the others? Im watching bits of it and it does look good but it being a 16 hour long journey I might as well ask for second opinions. It will be my first time watching it in full
>>129424476Its clear that everyone here is an incel and they are collectively listening to Wagner in honor of that.
>>129424499Solti's is just audio, anon.
speaking of opera for the weekend, I'm also gonna peep pic
>>129424524Oh right.
>>129424548Oh it was Levine I was thinking of and I see what >>129424333 said about it
>>129424548Another popular option is Boulez's but both musically and in art production design, his is a bit more idiosyncratic -- as Boulez is wont to do -- so yeah, I'd say start with Barenboim La Scala or Levine, and the video quality on Levine's is much, much worse, it looks like something off TV from the 90s (I'm still gonna watch it after I finish Barenboim's tho 'cuz I love Levine's conducting and it's still an acclaimed production). In short, stop worrying and just enjoy it.
>>129424499btw you'd probably figure this out anyway but just in case, on the Barenboim, the default subtitles are in Russia, you just right-click and switch the subtitle track to English.
>>129424476No. As I've said before - I don't celebrate holidays, especially the christian ones.
>>129422669Does no one here have a preference? Asked a few days ago - silence. I first listened to this recording https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4qovV8OkvsClassicstoday gives 30 recordings, so surely it is at least slightly popular?https://www.classicstoday.com/search-results/?search_composer_id=7631&search_composer=SIBELIUS%2C+JEAN&search_worktitle=violin+concertoTrying https://open.spotify.com/album/0YjS1DLWV8VlmfmC4HhUrmHilary Hahn with Swedish Radio Symphony Orchestra, Salonen Esa-Pekka conducting (DG). Paired with Schoenberg Violin Concerto. Well, that is uh... unexpected pairing. Hilary Hahn is a hit or miss for me. Absolutely love some of her interpretations, but sometimes she forgets to pretend there are emotions and feelings and stuff. Beating asians at their own game. Haven't heard much from Swedish Radio Symphony Orchestra, but actually listened to Salonen Esa-Pekka conducting his Horn Concerto and he was pretty good. Horn is not my favorite instrument though. Funny story actually. I was talking with one of my friends (who listens to rock, folk rock and a bit of everything) and sent him a violin piece where violin sounds as a guitar, because I was laboring under the impression that he likes the sound of guitar. Because it's everywhere in rock. But he's like "nope, I like all instruments about the same". After a lot of prodding he confessed that he doesn't like ukulele and most of the time doesn't care for banjo. For me music always started from a voice of an instrument. So, /classical/ do you care about which particular instrument is playing?Starting from Schoenberg Violin Concerto as God (Deutsche Grammophon) intended. Hahn was born to play Schoenberg. Sibelius sounds extra smooth after Schoenberg.Other recordings that look interesting: Joshua Bell (LA Phil, Sony), Cho-Liang Lin (SRSO, Sony), Sitkovetsky (conducted by Marriner). First to also by Salonen.
I gotta say, after listening to his operas, Mozart symphonies have lost some of their lustre for me.
>>129425017sorry didn't see your postOf course the essential one to start with is with the K-God/Ferrashttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCuWCbI7w9kAs for my personal choice, I've never had a favorite for the work, I just have a bunch of recordings I like. But if I had to choose, I'd probably opt for Shaham/Sinopolihttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nx2-BRIc20&list=OLAK5uy_lASg9-e4b_67aI3QQTSLSQ8gR0VbhCdBI&index=1or if not, Mullova/Ozawahttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBbf9FBDsh8&list=OLAK5uy_lbxcOqqLd04ohwtCb13J4fyj9xi_6G2LE&index=4and lastly, one I've been digging a lot recently is this more recent one with Barenboim/Batiashvilihttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGZh_VivKa4&list=OLAK5uy_mxubUKNhiL0fMMrWh42wxPnGwboNoqp7w&index=4The Shaham or Karajan are probably my desert island choices tho.
>>129425110They sure love pairing it with Tchaikovsky. Fine by me tho, can never have too many recordings of the great violin concerti.
>>129425017If you don't mind old school, you can never go wrong with Oistrakh and Ormandywww.youtube.com/watch?v=M-P183jzdfw
/classical/ does not mind old school. In fact, the older schooler, the better.
>>129425179This, but the opposite. 1970 is the cutoff, anything before is unlistenable. Realistically recordings only got semi-decent in the 90s.
>>129425179then there's this Heifetz one, which I read Sibelius himself lovedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNezfBxBiQobut I prefer how it's played in modern recordings; 26:28 is pretty damn fast!
>>129425219my #NoDeadMusicians2026 brother. if the main performers on the recording aren't still alive, it's too old, don't bother, we're going 2026 with only recordings from living musicians!
>>129425110New school, babyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37IFxGT9F3Q&list=OLAK5uy_mjXvOT3vSHkgGEIogd_5dQ55QkbOJkdFY&index=1
>>129425360Uncanny valley cover. Why are the covers for classical albums all so terribly awful besides Hamelin's? Is it that hard to just go fish a nice old painting for your works?
>>129425493Hamelin already used up all the good paintings :(
what are we /BLASTING/ classical xisters?for me it's the contrapuntal masterpiece "the red in the sky is ours" by seminal neo-classical quintet "at the gates"
Her name is meow...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hu0D35F1mP8
now playingstart of Rimsky-Korsakov: Scheherazade, Op. 35https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX2XTykgy8E&list=OLAK5uy_nnzOnhL8d5mmp5vy6FuPYa9opB73dUXvU&index=2Mussorgsky: Night on Bald Mountain (1867 Version) [Live]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FH90Dv_N1J0&list=OLAK5uy_nnzOnhL8d5mmp5vy6FuPYa9opB73dUXvU&index=6Mussorgsky: Night on Bald Mountain (1880 Version for Bass and Choir) [Live]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CfoC339Loo&list=OLAK5uy_nnzOnhL8d5mmp5vy6FuPYa9opB73dUXvU&index=6https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_nnzOnhL8d5mmp5vy6FuPYa9opB73dUXvU>In sum, this is a fine Scheherazade, beautifully played but not necessarily superior to classic versions; it is the two thrilling Mussorgsky novelties which for me constitute the main interest of this issue. ---- Ralph Moore, MusicWebIs Scheherazade the most universally beloved work in the standard classical repertoire? Quite possibly. If you don't like it, you might not even be human.
>>129425569hail, the princess of /classical/
>>129425518I think it might also be a Hyperion thing, scrolling through their discogs pages they tend to favor paintings over the "couple ugly dudes staring at you blankly" or the "menopause woman with a colored scarf doing a quirky motion".
Does Trifonov play literally everything slowly?
>>129425633I guess if you are only used to very fast recordings.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgJuRy3jIPE&list=OLAK5uy_kmQ5tchhUnSCEJIWUoAtuzNFsfClOM2pQ&index=6
>>129421186These symphonies are better than I remember. Granted I only ever tried them once before.
hiss sisters, what do you think of this recording?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHdFIj58Vck&list=OLAK5uy_nHtFdzWlFTJK2Q_IB_kTgFdQidSZqqk04&index=34https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aQpJygqqHI&list=OLAK5uy_nHtFdzWlFTJK2Q_IB_kTgFdQidSZqqk04&index=35https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZshihxGtM38&list=OLAK5uy_nHtFdzWlFTJK2Q_IB_kTgFdQidSZqqk04&index=36
There are lots of mega variation form like 15-24 at a time, but is there the same scale for the double variation form?
>her: what kind of music do you like, anon?>you: oh I'm into classical, haha. I know most don't these days but I love it.>her: I actually love classical too :)>you: what, no way. really? who are your favorite composers?>her: oh no idea, I just put on those "four hours of relaxing classical" mixes on YouTube while I do my homework :)your reaction?
>>129425826Is this hypothetical woman sexually attractive and available?
>>129425826Change the prompts on my AI girlfriend to include the classical repertoire.
>beethoven piano sonata 32: 5k views>first movement of beethoven's moonlight sonata on loop for 2 hours: 2m+ viewsO_O
>>129425878>people have fucking rocks for brainswow
overheard a couple shopping for wine at the grocery store whistling Ligeti
>>129425886Just tryin' to be amusing, anon
Put all Hamelin's albums on a playlist, I regret not having done it earlier, the guy is a fucking legend, this is an incredible way to discover new music too.
>>129425878>Soulless numbered tracks vs Soulful named tracks
>>129425937Based, his Haydn is gud too even though pretty sure no one listens to it. Its like a one stop shop for everything lol. Wish he would finish the Fienberg sonatas and also Ornstein's. Then do all of Clementi.
>>129426140Someone here recommended his Scriabin Sonatas recording, after listening to it I though "damn, I've listened to so many recordings by this guy (Franck, Feinberg, Baker, Turnage, Roslavets, Liszt, Scriabin, Ravel...) and don't remember ever disliking any of them, might as well just bite the bullet and listen to all his stuff" kek
I am in a world, where I am taking a stroll in a beautiful park built by the divine, suddenly my legs feel tired and request to stop. Cordially I went on ahead to sit under the shade of a chestnut tree. My fatigue washes away from me as I slip into my imaginative daydreaming, I can hear the melancholic chirping of the sparrows and the water flowing from the creeks, feel the gust of a chilly wind approaching my face, smell the rejuvenating fragrance of the good earth. But then I realize I was just listening to the start of Lohengrin. I a poor soul, venerate the gods for creating such beauty and allowing an inferior soul like me to experience it!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG53S27HI5k
>>129426193That was also me (probably), honestly if you get into piano music is basically impossible to avoid the guy, and like you said, literally nothing is outright bad. I'm somewhat close to touring his entire collection simply by checking out niche piano composers. The last stuff is the either the regular repertoire like CPE Bach and Mozart, female literally who composers, and literally who contemporary composers. A crazy power couple is him with the Takacs quartet, you couldn't ask for a better set for a quintet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEA4Xbytmhs&list=OLAK5uy_maHtibL-10JgapdriK5O6PalJjzDl70CI&index=1Really wish they had done Taneyev, Medtner, and Brahms.
I remember my music teacher saying that metal was basically the classical music of today
>>129425781a solid one
Chopinhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVtQ7a5VsB8&list=OLAK5uy_l2-on2_2GY60q6k3UkQisMw3x_gKUkx68&index=55
Mozarthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V9gyB3yFqM&list=OLAK5uy_kvtXOjH8d3nPsIMX1a04f6Wyivcp-ysa4&index=1
>>129427375nice
now playingstart of Saint-Saens: Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 22https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLq6JxPHYWE&list=OLAK5uy_nlKv1jfibXQQbkDCB5A7xTh2xvdO-dJBI&index=2start of Saint-Saens: Piano Concerto No. 5 in F Major, Op. 103 "Egyptian"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm_j2umHb4s&list=OLAK5uy_nlKv1jfibXQQbkDCB5A7xTh2xvdO-dJBI&index=5Saint-Saens: 6 Études, Op. 111: No. 4, Les cloches de Las Palmashttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEMbAEHB9I0&list=OLAK5uy_nlKv1jfibXQQbkDCB5A7xTh2xvdO-dJBI&index=7and then several more solo piano pieceshttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_nlKv1jfibXQQbkDCB5A7xTh2xvdO-dJBI
>>129428220>the only competent French composer>is also gaywhat an absolute joke of a country.
thoughts on CPE Bach?
>>129428278You actually typed this up and posted it.
>>129428301his sonatas are underrated.
>>129428329shitting on France will never not be funny.
>>129428301Chicago Bach was better
TRIIIISTANISOOOOLDEE[chromatic sludge plays]
>>129428301Good if you're really into that kind of music.
Is this a fugue at 0:18?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbp2UngT9Ko&t=18s
>129428573(you)
did you know Sibelius has solo piano music?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MPXDoB6jc8
>>129428619yes. check out Gould's recordings of his sonatas.
>>129428634:Owell I'll behttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taiU7IbqNDE
Wagnerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FySFpAhX84k&list=OLAK5uy_nD8iuwxBRh5NhJgibbOa6HSX4BYWLHMHw&index=1
let's check what's new on theclassicreview...>Review: “Piano Heroines” – Claire Huangci>Claire Huangci’s latest project took root five years ago, when she learned Clara Wieck’s Piano Concerto for the composer’s 200th birthday. Since then, her passion for female composers has expanded and here, she features Wieck alongside Florence Price, Fanney Hensel, and Amy Beach.this triggers the /classical/ sister>Had it not been for the social constraints of her time, Fanny Hensel may well have outshined her brother, Felix Mendelssohn; works like her Capriccio in B minor (tracks 1-2) show an impressive variety of compositional styles, Classical refinement, and virtuosic flair.LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL>This generous program presents four women with distinct voices, underscoring why their music’s wider recognition is long overdue. A wonderful effort from Huangci.https://theclassicreview.com/album-reviews/review-piano-heroines-claire-huangci/fannyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkBbkYWuHY&list=OLAK5uy_mzHZvP_3zYBvql_1zKbc7P2O_gB-Eq3us&index=2some amy beachhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P24sBu63csg&list=OLAK5uy_mzHZvP_3zYBvql_1zKbc7P2O_gB-Eq3us&index=12some florence price, actually titled Fantasie Nègre No. 2 in G Minorhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v3B-MCaoe0&list=OLAK5uy_mzHZvP_3zYBvql_1zKbc7P2O_gB-Eq3us&index=19fun stuff
and for those here who don't listen to female composers, here's a Scarlatti recording by the same pianist, Claire Huangcihttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyXLW801al8&list=OLAK5uy_nRBIj9rFjTSimXa1PqbwLDtTbQZFeOf0k&index=8>Asked what music she wanted to play on her second solo album, she shot back: ""Scarlatti!"". nice
>>129428705>scarlatti on pianolol
>be me>watching Tristan und Isolde>decide to only watch half (~2 hours) and save the rest for tomorrow>still feel like listening to music>put on a recording of Tristan und Isoldefug
>>129428716if I were a billionaire, I would buy every clavichord, harpsichord, and fortepiano on the planet only to destroy them all
>>129428760doing Bach's work, anon.
>be me 2 years ago>listen exclusively to classical>browse /classical/, talkclassical and gramophone religiously looking for the best recordings>massive amounts of storage wasted on operas downloaded from rutracker and flacs downloaded from soulseek>suddenly it clicks that listening to classical demands way too much time and attention>delete everything and start listening to stuff like Paramore or My Chemical Romance while playing video games insteadI'm happier nowI feel free
>>129428817this but in reverse
In seriousness, I don't see how exploring the wide variety of recordings of pieces in classical could ever be a chore. It's not like you have to try 20 recordings before you can finally sit down and enjoy a piece, sure, that'd be a chore. You just try a different one every other time you listen to the music, and along the way you know which ones you liked more or less, which ones you'd like to hear again, and rank them in your head, and when a new one comes out, you give it a chance. That's all there is to it. In classical, these are pieces you're gonna listen to hundreds of time in your life, why would you want to stick to the same single recording of it the entire time anyway? The multiplicity of interpretations and performances is a beneficial resource.
Schumannhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftTLJOqHK68
8 hours into the Der Ring des Nibelungen Teatro alla Scala
>>129429328That's further than me, I've only seen the first two operas so far (so ~7 hour since Das Rheingold is only under 3 hours). What do you think?
>>129429328btw Teatro alla Scala is just the venue, when talking about it you should at least include the conductor too (Daniel Barenboim). it's be like saying you watched Don Giovanni MET.
>>129429346Its a great story so far, the production is what you would expect from a stage play but after a while you kind of forget anyway because of how immersed you are in the story and the music. >>129429364Thats just what the file is called for me but yeah its the Barenboim feature.
>>129429402Glad you're liking it too. I'm not a Wagner expert like some anons here but all of the singing I find to be top-notch.
Schumann's Davidsbündlertänze has the power to save the worldhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oej2HOTFIy0link to Cortot performance for the RachAnon, but hopefully they like the Jorg Demus recording abovehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw7e2ox5UHw
>>129428817>suddenly it clicks that listening to classical demands way too much time and attentionYou should've known that from the very beginning, but you're a moron.Enjoy your slop.
>writes a cantata using profane medieval latin/old german poems>mogs the entirety of religious latin music>does nothing else what did he mean by this
>>129430277Probably meant that he didnt mog anything
Classical needs drums
>>129430307So true phillistine sister
Where are all the black composers?
>tfw trio section of Chopin's 4th scherzohttps://youtu.be/dITpN9nBi90?si=ay-H8DxjKCTVYYDv&t=173
>>129430337Dont let this distract you from the fact that chopin couldnt write for orchestra
>>129430333Jazz is nigger classical, rap is nigger serialism
>Clara Wieck
>>129430455My Wieck is pretty Clara
Somehow Prokofiev's piano concertos feel like he's not really taking it seriously.
Feel like crying broshttps://youtu.be/F9Vc1Q-LA_0
>>129430562Crying of joy or embarrassment?
>>129430605Just feel amazed and thankful at it.
>>129430520 The cadenza of 2nd along with recap is single most 'serious' section in the whole concerto repertoire. Sounds more 'serious' than Rach 3 1zt mov and Mozart 20th Beethoven cadenzas. That said 3rd concerto is better because it doesn't have any weak spots, 2nd has a meandering finale.The rest of his concerti aren't as good imo, but I might change my mind someday.
>>129430520As >>129430630 noted, besides that 2nd cadenza Prokofiev never took anything seriously, his entire repertoire is ironic carnival melodies mocking the classical era and then going BANG BANG BANG to show hes "modern". I was entirely confused when I learned that he wasn't Jewish, because its usually Jewish composers that are obsessed with irony and lack genuine feelings.
Mozart
>>129430927https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw21560Pk1c
Elizondo > Gould
https://youtu.be/UniXSQYJd-k
I assembled a new Chopin sonata, in order of harmonic relations and forms of the standard classical piano sonatas, for fun:1. Sonata-'allegro' in tonic - Ballade no.4 in F minor2. Scherzo in subdominant - Scherzo no. 2 in B-flat minor3. Slow movement in tonic - Nocturne in F minor op.55 no.14. Finale in parallel major - Rondo in F major op.5What's funny, is that this is the only way to use both a ballade and a scherzo for the standard classical sonata, others aren't so closely related. You could use a waltz/prelude instead of scherzo for a more genuine, small-scale scherzo and slow movement > scherzo order, but I wanted to use standalone scherzos.For the finale, 2nd ballade in F major also works, it has hybrid rondo-sonata form, but ends on relative of the dominant (A minor) so the op.5 might be the better choice. The worst thing about this mutt-sonata is how conclusively and powerfully the 1st movement (4th ballade) would conclude, the rest wouldn't exactly follow. But it's still a better order than listening to albums with unrelated works, IMO. After all, I made it for fun but you can assemble a playlist and make it into a real thing lol.
>>129431701I meant just 'powerfully conclude'
>>129431701>when the chopincel is so desperate for long form he starts stitching together multiple salon pieces together in a spotify playlistWhy don't you just do yourself a favor and listen to Godowsky's sonata or something?
>>129431760A single ballade is more powerful than Godowsky's entire career, aside maybe from his recordings which are pretty great.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eo59optokPE
Yes, we Chopincels know that.
>>129431796I would consider just the final movement of his sonata to be better than anything Chopin ever wrote (Cyclic returning of themes in the other movements, B-A-C-H fugue, funeral march, and Dies Irae), and his Passacaglia to be an example of some of the finest writing there is. Considering Chopin couldn't even write a listenable fugue, I wouldn't put much stock in the salonslopper. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdSAb48tV8M
The dies irae is so overused I actually physically cringe whenever I hear it.
>>129431873No you don't, or do you "physically cringe" when the piece travels from minor into "struggle" and then the triumphant major "wins" at the end?
>>129431857I've heard the sonata and I find that description vastly exaggerated, although I'll pay more attention to the finale next time around.Best thing Godowsky did are the Chopin nocturnes (no, not the modified etudes). Which reminds me of the nocturne list I completed and will be posting now
>>129431882Yes I do actually.
Best recordings of each nocturne:Op. 9 no.1 - KoczalskiOp. 9 no.2 - Rachmaninoff (honorable mention: Koczalski, Hofmann, Cortot)Op. No.3 - TiegermanOp.15 no.1 - CortotOp.15 no.2 - Pugno (Busoni, Cortot)Op.15 no.3 - SmeterlinOp.27 no.1. - Cortot (!!!) (Bartok)Op.27 no.2 - Hofmann (!!!) (Rosenthal)Op.32 no.1 - KoczalskiOp.32 no.2 - FriedbergOp.37 no.1 - KoczalskiOp.37 no.2 - Godowsky (Moiseiwitsch)Op.48 no.1 - Koczalski (Hofmann (!!!))Op.48 no.2 - GodowskyOp.55 no.1 - Pachmann (Rubinstein, Cortot)Op.55 no.2 - Friedman (Cortot)Op.62 no.1 - HorowitzOp.62 no.2 - Moiseiwitsch (!!!)!!!s indicate highly unique performances, although not necessarily the best (48/1).The prelude to this is the nocturne ranking I made earlier
>>129431893>I find that description vastly exaggerated,Coming from the guy who says Chopin is the greatest composer of all time? Lol. >Best thing Godowsky did are the [easy to understand salon pieces with big melody for me]Figures. Never change norsebot. His Passacaglia is his masterpiece, and he thought that himself, not that you need him to tell you - if only you had the ear for structure instead of big tunes.
>>129431915>if only you had the ear for structure instead of big tunes.If you only knew what you were talking about.
>>129431917Well you don't have to believe me, maybe take the words of Schumann instead, a composer you hold so dear to you:>He described the sonata [Chopin's second] as "four of [his] maddest children under the same roof" and found the title "Sonata" capricious and slightly presumptuous. He also remarked that the Marche funèbre "has something repulsive" about it, and that "an adagio in its place, perhaps in D-flat, would have had a far more beautiful effect".[45] In addition, the finale caused a stir among Schumann and other musicians. Schumann said that the movement "seems more like a mockery than any [sort of] music",What about Mendelssohn?>when Felix Mendelssohn was asked for an opinion of it, he commented, "Oh, I abhor it".Just for laughs:>James Huneker remarked that the four movements of the sonata "have no common life", and that the sonata "is not more a sonata than it is a sequence of ballades and scherzi."
Me when I read a Chopincel post with a tranime pic (direct quotation):>"Oh, I abhor it"
>>129431929Why would I take anyone's words, when I can listen to it myself and make up my own mind? Strange. Not that Schumann is completely wrong, the 2nd is quite ahead of its time. The 3rd sonata is far superior and in the same league as Beethoven's 30th, and D960 though, 3 of the sonatas I consider the finest, but it's overshadowed by the 2nd.
>>129431949>Why would I take anyone's words, when I can listen to it myself and make up my own mind? Strange.Glad to hear you have begun asking yourself that, I've been asking you this every time you've posted that fat ogre eceleb here and all the opinions you regurgitated from youtube slop. >D960Ignoring the rest of your usual Chopincel delusions of his grandeur, I'm still waiting for for explanation for why you promote Shubert's sonatas when during his time these pieces were ignored entirely, and were only explored after the IQ's of the west started to decline as per your own vomit. Are you suggesting that you have low IQ?
>>129431902So what do you do, listen to only modernist composers and renaissance music?
>>129431986>every time you've posted that fat ogre eceleb here and all the opinions you regurgitated from youtube slop.Why would I conceal my opinion if it agrees with someone on youtube? Why wouldn't I post/discuss someone else's opinons, even if I disagree with them?>when during his time these pieces were ignored entirelyHow is this relevant?>and were only explored after the IQ's of the west started to declineThis is an embarrassing non-sequitur, and as I've said, I won't respond to such a silly question since I don't reckon you're asking in good faith.
>>129432013>Why would I conceal my opinion if it agrees with someone on youtubeI think you mean you got your opinion from youtube because you let others do the thinking for you. >How is this relevant?>This is an embarrassing non-sequiturNorsebot, you really, really need to relearn debate terminology, these are not 4chan buzzwords like "slop", they have actual meaning. You have previously shown yourself unable to use "goalpost" properly, and now are unable to use "non-sequitur" properly. Since you are ignorant I am forced to explain, because if I asked you to showcase the "non-sequitur" you would be unable to do so, and would in your usual fashion return to spam or buzzwords.Your beliefs:a) Shubert's sonatas are goodb) The IQs of peoples has drastically fallen in the past 200 years. The contradiction:a) Shubert's sonatas during the time of the higher IQ peoples was ignored as half rate Beethoven sonatas with the emotional appeal of wallpapers and landscape paintingsb) Only after all the IQs had dropped did anyone start to care about his sonatasNow I know you aren't nearly as smart as you wish you were, but I feel like even you could understand what is being said when put in this simplistic and bulletpoint format.
Holy fuck there's so much music. You'll come across some composer you've never heard of, look him up on Wikipedia and find out he's written like 40 full operas. What the hell.
>>129432115>I think you mean you got your opinion from youtubeBelieve what you will, but stop bothering me with questions if you already made up your mind.>if I asked you to showcase the "non-sequitur" you would be unable to do soHere's the definition from cambridge:>a statement that does not correctly follow from the meaning of the previous statementNow, your first statement:>when during his time these pieces were ignored entirelyYour second statement:>were only explored after the IQ's of the west started to declineThe second one does not correctly follow from the first one, "IQ" is not be required to "explore", popularize and canonize a piece or a set of pieces, ergo it is a non-sequitur, as previously stated.>The contradiction:These aren't contradictions.>was ignored as half rate Beethoven sonatas with the emotional appeal of wallpapers and landscape paintingsImpossible to know. These pieces were not popular, and consensus would not emerge as a result. Schubert's symphony in c major The Great was only discovered by Schumann long after Schubert's death, and it became so important that Bruckner's and Mahler's symphonies would hardly be imaginable in the same shape as they are, without its existence. Now, explaining something so simple took energy and time I would use for something else, instead I'm here talking to someone like they're a literal imbecile, only to be met with inaccurate response full of more such idiotic questions. If you want to have a Socratic dialogue, pick a better topic or approach the topic from a more interesting angle or better yet, go over to someplace else.
I sincerely hope that you are doing all this as some sort of exercise for your high school debate team and don't actually believe it.
>>129432253>You'll come across some composer you've never heard of, look him up on Wikipedia and find out he's written like 40 full operas. What the hell.The good composers got remembered, if they aren't regularly performed today they are certainly shit.People like Reger and Poulenc are the baseline, if a composer is less popular than even them, they suck.
>>129432115>>129432257Not to mention, Schubert rarely performed publicly, majority of his output is not for concert. If Beethoven did not actively perform and promoted his piano concertos, violin concerto, opera, symphonies, he would remain in obscurity for a long while as well. And he would not be able to keep composing if he didn't earn the right amount of money, got in contact with the right publishers, patrons, audience etc. And music is not popularity contest, so all this is irrelevant in regards to the quality.>>129432286Sadly, he is being serious, you can track his previous conversations here, it looks like he just wants to debate someone but can't find anyone else anywhere, which is understandable, but by acting like the most annying kid, he's doing disservice to himself without realizing it.
>>129432257>"IQ" is not be required to "explore", popularize and canonize a piece or a set of piecesAnd now this is bad faith. You have previously stated that classical music was the main form of music in the past, and the reason for the decline in popularity is a lack of IQ. So you must also follow that IQ is actually needed to popularize and canonize a piece. After all, I don't know of many Africans interested in classical, do you? I do know that Jewish and Asian peoples tend to be. It is evident that IQ is in-fact needed to enjoy certain music, and you have also linked the two together numinous times in your Dutton vomit.The reality is of course, that you do not actually believe your latest statement, but rather are grasping at straws for any sort of defense imaginable. In regards to both your contradictory enjoyment of Shubert's wallpaper sonatas, and also your inability to use debate terminology properly. >Impossible to know. These pieces were not popularNot the case, for the rest of Shurbert's music WAS popular and well known, it is not the case that Shubert's sonatas were never given a shot, but rather that they were INTENTIONALLY unpopular by these higher IQ peoples.
>>129432353>Sadly, he is being seriousYou have a lack of self-awareness Norsebot, he is referring to BOTH of us. >by acting like the most annying kidIts a bit ironic when you have posts like this in the archive, no?https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/128836326/#128840331In-fact you were a constant intentional irritant on /metal/ when you posted there, every day spamming Kaevum because you knew it would annoy others. Like I said: lack of self-awareness.
>>129432374As noted earlier, more nonsense and bad faith.>the reason for the decline in popularity is a lack of IQ. Part of the reason. Nothing is as simple as black and white. >So you must also follow that IQ is actually needed to popularize and canonize a piece. Massive oversimplification.>It is evident that IQ is in-fact needed to enjoy certain musicTrue. There is a moderate positive correlation between g factor and musical abilities and preferences.>the rest of Shurbert's music WAS popular and well knownAs I pointed out, it wasn't. One of his most important works was discovered by Schumann. And as I stated in my last comment >>129432353, his music rarely ever performed, even by the composer himself. He chose composition, instead of performance, and became one of the most prolific composers.>>129432389That's an obvious shitpost, not the beginning of a ridiculously long debate.If your intention is to annoy others, then I should stop responding and reasoning with you. At least I would be honest after an exchange or two if I were being honest initially, you just drag your shitposting to the extremes without a way of knowing if you're genuinely dumb or trolling.
>>129432436>True. There is a moderate positive correlation between g factor and musical abilities and preferences.In other words: what I said originally was not a non-sequitur. Easy as that, next time do us all a favor and just take the immediate L rather than wasting my time.
>>129432460>when during his time these pieces were ignored entirely>were only explored after the IQ's of the west started to declineThis is still a non-sequitur for the reasons I explained, but sure, whatever floats your boat. I still don't believe you're being honest, you shouldn't be that dumb. Although dishonesty is much worse than a lack of wit.
>>129430333see the Price piece here >>129428693
>>129431913yikes but thanks for sharing
>>129432505You should stop hunting for last replies, no need to be a sore loser. You did the same thing in the "goalpost" situation, and well, basically every other situation you're in. Side note: I was speaking previously about your lack of self-awareness, but calling me dishonest when you constantly change your grammar pretending to be other people and lying about that (only to give up when it becomes too obvious) is what I would call dishonesty. But again, you'll never admit the obvious, and you'll just hunt for that last reply wishing it will give you a victory for once. Speaking of lack of self-awareness: https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/122809004/#122836709
what are you guys even arguing about, c'mon
>>129432566Argument's already over, Norsebot was forced to admit what I wrote was not a non-sequitur, and now its just a matter of him replying endlessly until everyone stops reading.
>>129432549Now make your own, not necessarily nocturnes, you can do Beethoven sonatas, say the last 10, let's see if listening to godzillion moderm sets helped you pick the best ones (lol)>>129432551You can have the "last reply" as you seem to be obsessed with that, I just prefer to correct false accusations specifically this one:>when you constantly change your grammar pretending to be other peopleI never did that. At least, it was never my intention, sincerely.
>>129432566I'd ask you to read through this ridiculous conversation, and tell us if it actually was a non-sequitur or not, but it would be an unpleasant waste of your time.
Medtner.
>>129432598>I never did that. At least, it was never my intention, sincerely.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAIs that why you go from no capitalization or punctuation:https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#q129422137To no capitalization: https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#q129422162To capitalization and punctuation when called out for it:https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#129422261All within three posts, yet notably you ALWAYS without fail make sure to perfectly emulate sisterspammer's lack of capitalization when you emulate his posts, and you ALWAYS without fail make sure to capitalize and punctuate your posts when you aren't pretending to be others (such as this entire conversation where you never once failed to do so). You're just a liar, one big fat lying piece of shit. Anything to garner a bit of reputation, anything to "win" an argument, anything so long as it helps you. And you project all your shitty personality traits onto others, the biggest "dishonest" and "intentioanlly annoying" poster to exist here is (you).
>>129432598>Now make your own, not necessarily nocturnes, you can do Beethoven sonatas, say the last 10, let's see if listening to godzillion moderm sets helped you pick the best ones (lol)what did I say about not looking at the IP on my posts!?
>>129432669Yes, I was actually pretending to be two different people in the same post.
>>129432675>"thanks for sharing">how did you know it was meNaiveIdiot moment.
Why is this schizo always analyzing posts like he's a detective
>>129432690Fuck you. But also, just because I disagree with their choices, and abhor their hi-fidelity to the hiss, doesn't mean I don't appreciate the effort, and I'd hate to discourage it in them or anyone else.
>>129432695LOL. Good question.
>>129432689>Yes, I was actually pretending to be two different people in the same post.If you are referring to the third post, the second part thats not capatalized is that way because you are emulating a sisterposter catchphrase, you are incredibly consistent with these grammar traits, there is not "oops I just forgot this post". In reality you pretend to be people other than yourself and change your grammar on purpose so that you don't have to deal with your own lying dishonest reputation.
>>129432704>I'd hate to discourage it in them or anyone else.Yes, well, I don't call you NaiveGenius now do I.
>>129432717So why would I pretend to be someone else in the very same post, when it's evident I'm the same person? Are you just accusing me of schizophrenia? If so, then just say so, no need for word puzzles.
>>129432731At that point you were not pretending to be anyone else, the very post it was replying to was me calling you out for who you were, its a mark to the dedication you go to to ensure your grammar is always in a certain way intentionally and without mistake. And because it is without mistake, it means the first two posts were intentionally dishonest and there was no "oopsie tee hee, I just didn't notice I hadn't pressed shift!"Its ok norsebot, not everyone has a good character, some people like you are lying deceitful vermin who do anything for an internet "win".
>>129432725>listens to metal>calls other people dumbAnon, I...
>>129432767>>129432767>>129432767
>>129432778I mean aren't you the person who spent an entire year talking to a metaltard who "listened to metal for 16 years" and fed him recommendations he spat on each and every time? Sad enough is that you'll keep doing it too because you're desperate and incapable of pattern recognition. Like I said previous, even /metal/ was smart enough to know not to bother recommending him anything.
>>129432768No I did that multiple times, I didn't even read what you posted. I was never pretending to be someone else.It's pointless discussing with you, you are paranoid, with schizophrenic tendencies and full-on dishonesty.
>>129432810I'm a nice guy, and I believe in charitability. Plus me and the RachAnon share a love for Rachmaninoff and Chopin, a bond strengthened since certain other posters hated them.
>>129432814>No I did that multiple times, I didn't even read what you posted. I was never pretending to be someone else.$25? What do you mean $10? Sorry I can hardly afford the $5 you're asking for. Anyways where's that $10 you owe me?
>>129432860Here, see >>>129139091Obviously not pretending to be someone else, but of course, you'll just keep pushing your paranoid position so that you can keep arguing on this general forever. That's your only purpose. Shitpost, off-topic, schizopost, argue, repeat.>>129432838Just Rach and Chopin, or about majority of composers, Mahlerkun?
>>129432838>>129432838>I'm a nice guy, and I believe in charitability.You mean naive and desperate. Imagine being charitable to someone like the below. >>129432883>Here, see >>>129139091Another post where you don't capitalize in order to emulate sisterposter's catchphrase while keeping your own regular text capitalized and punctuated. Which is another example that your grammar changes are made intentionally, https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#q129422137 and https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#q129422162 were intentionally designed in order to pretend to be someone else with no excuse of accidental change. Yet you'll lie and lie and lie and lie forever and ever no matter how obvious it is.
>>129432883>Just Rach and Chopin, or about majority of composers, Mahlerkun?I'm just talking about the primary catalyst for the bond.>>129432925>You mean naive and desperate. Imagine being charitable to someone like the below.Hell, I'm even charitable to you, aren't I? Offering you recommendations and responding to your on-topic effortposts which contain music, even though most here would prefer I didn't entertain you? It's just what I'm about, and what I'd like any community to be about.
Hopefully going to finish the rest of Der Ring des Nibelungen (Barenboim Productions) today
>>129432976I'm putting it on hold because I decided to watch the first half of Tristan und Isolde yesterday, and I wanna finish that first before I watch Siegfried.btw post in the new thread>>129432767>>129432767also you have such a strange writing style. Sure you're not a bot? lol
>>129432925>intentionally designed in order to pretend to be someone elseNo, as I already showed you, and here's another right after that: >>129139099, I never pretended to be someone else. Unless you're accusing me of schizophrenia, because I can't be two people at the same time in a single post. Now, talk about lying when you spammed this general by replying to random posts and to yourself, pretending to be me.But this will be my last reply on this topic, not only was I right about everything about you, you've proven yourself to be a sociopath for real this time. I'm not so familiar with paranoid behaviors, but I would bet it's more than just paranoia. Your prefrontal cortex is deficient.
>>129432951>Hell, I'm even charitable to you, aren't I?And should you? Afterall, I don't think you're very smart, and probably he doesn't either, as he's let slip a few times in one of his few moments of honesty. You are of course free to feed your own desires, I would imagine you're just desperate to share something with anyone who will reply to you, regardless of their personality, thoughts about yourself, or even if they value your efforts. It you like it despite the obvious, go ahead, but most people know when a conversation is fruitless. In the case of conversations involving you two together its like watching two people masturbating while turned away from each other, a plastic sort of discussion.
>>129433013lol> I would imagine you're just desperate to share something with anyone who will reply to you, regardless of their personality, thoughts about yourself, or even if they value your efforts. It you like it despite the obvious, go ahead, but most people know when a conversation is fruitless.I just want to help people get into classical music, that's all. Hitler himself could ask for a recommendation for a Mozart piano sonata cycle and I'd give him an answer.
>>129433000>here's another right after thatAnother post where you de-capitalize while emulating sisterspammer, yet keep your actual text in full normal grammar. Just give up, given this is the second time in a row, clearly you can't find any examples proving what I've said is wrong.
>>129430333Africa has a bunch of cool music traditions, they were great at polyrhythms and polyphony https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1UcA3Bbr60https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xVx2ycwjhQhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cATZe_jlc9gReminds me of what European classical was doing in the renaissance era with multiple voiceshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnogT0JsJJ0You can also really hear the inspiration it had on composers like Steve Reich
>deliberately misses "I can't be two people at the same time in a single post."Sociopathy indeed.>>129433013Not him, but you haven't seen our conversations really. I have discovered some recordings from him and vice versa. Sometimes I share my thoughts on recording X,Y, and it can range from bad to mediocre to pretty good, sometimes he does as well but rarely elaborates unfortunately. Other times we discuss other on-topic subjects.Now,why don't you take your sociopathic ass back to other boards? Clearly, this general isn't as unhinged as you'd like it to be. /pol/ is full of such bitter posters, I presume you're a /pol/tard.
>>129433108>sometimes he does as well but rarely elaborates unfortunately.To be fair, only because the audio quality is usually the dominant factor. If you gave a clear recording, I might have more to offer! Then again I don't play an instrument or know any theory, so anything I can offer would just be descriptive adjectives which amount to my own subjective perception and whether I like it or not.
>>129433028Well, do as you will, personally I know better than to waste my time giving recs for people who are only giving you lip service and will never actually care about what you post. All of /metal/ realized quickly what sort of person Norsepleb is, but as I said, you do it to feed your own feelings, and in return you both masturbate in separate corners looking away from each other. "Please look at this oh norsebot!", and then in return"it was fine, but I prefer [insert youtubeslop reccomendation] as only the higher minded people of higher IQ can figure this out, I will keep your rec in mind *never listens to or thinks about it again*". I personally have no interest in such things.
>>129433147>"I know better than to waste my time giving recs...">is a literal spammerc'mon anon, you can't be serious...
>>129433108>>deliberately misses "I can't be two people at the same time in a single post."Because none of those peoples are you trying to be multiple people, nor was it ever said as much. What was said at the beginning is that "yet notably you ALWAYS without fail make sure to perfectly emulate sisterspammer's lack of capitalization when you emulate his posts", which you have proven with your own examples. At this point I'm not sure if you are just really stupid or not, but the reason that it's important is because it shows your grammar is never a mistake, its never like you unintentionally change it, you do it on purpose for specific reasons. and when you make entire posts like https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#q129422137 and https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#q129422162 that aren't emulating sisterposter and are without your usual grammer, its because you want to pretend to not be yourself. >Sometimes I share my thoughts on recording X,Y, and it can range from bad to mediocre to pretty good,Yeah it was already covered here >>129433147
>>129433158>>is a literal spammerBut enough about Norsebot and his history of spamming generals.https://desuarchive.org/mu/search/text/insomniac/page/3/
>>129433207>none of those peoplesnone of those posts*
>>129433146It's been a lot of hiss lately but I've given you non-hiss recs but you didn't say much besides that you liked it.Not that I'm dying to hear what reviewers say (I rarely if ever read them), but sometimes I'm wondering why you have preference for recording X when it sounds almost exactly like Y or nothing like Z. But as I've said, it doesn't really matter, it's not about me but yourself, if you prefer to post Amazon reviews over your own, it's your choice. After all, you might agree with the reviews you post so those might be considered "your own". I probably shouldn't have said 'unfortunately' there.>>129433207You're good at baiting me into conversations I wasn't going to continue.>you want to pretend to not be yourself.How? If I'm obviously myself in the very same post, how am I pretending to be not myself?
>>129433284Sometimes the reviewers have something interesting to say. At the very least, I always enjoy reading a well articulated opinion and description of the recording, whether or not I agree with it.
>>129433284>How? If I'm obviously myself in the very same post, how am I pretending to be not myself?NorseLiar, why are you even lying like you weren't pretending to be someone else? What reason did you have to change your grammer like that? You weren't emulating sisterposter, so thats not it. We know you are very particular about your grammar for when you capitalize or not, as you've so helpfully proven. And we know it wasn't even a one time mistake since you did it multiple times in a row. The reality is that you're dishonest, even now, you are a projector of your own insults of my character. >>129433327He's calling you an idiot btw, in case you still haven't figured it out. Of course if you realized that you could just laugh at him for taking youtube slop seriously and throw his insults about your amazon reviews right back in his face. But then again, You woudn't be who you are if you could clue in to what people really mean when they speak to you.
>>129433327For the record, I wasn't being sarcastic, but I can see why he'd think so. He's a sociopath btw.>>129433354>What reason did you have to change your grammer like that? You want to know the reason, and to achieve this you go through all this shitheap to bait me into these ridiculous conversations through exaggerated, dramatic strawmans and false accusations, you're a manipulator sociopath lol.I'm not projecting as Mahlerkun can attest, although you'd just dismiss him as "NaiveIdiot".
>>129433439>>129433354>throw his insults about your amazon reviews right back in his faceLOL. I'm glad I went back to this, if this isn't the proof that you're a literal sociopath and/or pretending to be one for stupid fun, then I don't know what is.
>>129433439>You want to know the reasonI know the answer and did so long ago, I just do this because watching you squirm around trying to find different ways to excuse yourself is fun. If you were the type of person who could just admit to being who you are I wouldn't bother doing this at all since that is very boring, its specifically because I know you can never admit a fault that I do it, between a rock (admitting a fault) and a hard place (being a circus clown as you prance about finding new excuses). Thats real entertainment.
>>129433284Also, btw, while sometimes I do post Amazon community reviews, the excerpts I post are, while listed in the Editorial Reviews section on the recording's page on Amazon, taken from reviews and writers originally from another site/publication, like MusicWeb, Gramophone, The New York Times, classical.net, whatever. Not that this distinction really matters, because what something has to say is far more important than where it came from, but still.
>>129433501>If you were the type of person who could just admit to being who you areI would admit most things about myself without hesitation if someone asked nicely. A liar wouldn't admit of being a liar, so your question is just extremely naive and/or yet another mischievous provocation (my bet is on the latter). The fact that I can't be two persons in the same post disproves this paranoid idea.>Thats real entertainment.It's entertainment only for overly socially-stimulated (hyper-mentalism, paranoia a.k.a. schizophrenia) individuals, but you don't seem like a social person, that leaves us a highly neurotic, autistic and sociopathic individual whk's hungry for attention and doesn't know how else to stimulate his dopamine receptors.
>>129433533I rarely if ever even read classicstoday reviews, but I do tend to somewhat trust their ratings, and I enjoy listening to Hurwitz especially when he shows audio examples and such. And btw, are you keeping track of the other conversation? Surely, this idiot is a sociopath, nothing else explains his incessant, strange behavior.
>>129433549>A liar wouldn't admit of being a liarExactly, you have the personality which drives forth an endless cycle of contradicts and silliness that is only amplified in entertainment value when you refuse to simply admit they happened or are what they are. Any normal person would have just admitted you were pretending to be someone else as you clearly were, but only you would craft some completely random discussion about if you are pretending to be two people at once despite fully knowing well that isn't what you are accused of. Its like an argument that never ends because you'll never accept a fault or defeat.
>>129433587>about if you are pretending to be two people at once despite fully knowing well that isn't what you are accused of.So what the hell am I accused of? I'm not a liar, maybe I'm just naive or dumb and I can't grasp your 4D chess.
>>129433587>endless cycle of contradictsAnd also, contradictions are fine, especially if there was a time gap between the contradictory statements. The delusion that everything must make perfect sense is naive. Have a banana-man explain this to you:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBT6FxniqB0
>>129433572Fair enough. I personally love reading reviews, or any writing on art, even if it's simply explaining what I'm experiencing, because I think there's value in mere articulation and organization of thoughts, even if they aren't new and different. But that's me, and I suppose I can see the other side which has no interest, particularly if it's out of preference to just experience the art on one's own, trust that reaction, and move on. That's not me though. I guess that's the writer's mentality!
>>129433572>>129433704>And btw, are you keeping track of the other conversation? Surely, this idiot is a sociopath, nothing else explains his incessant, strange behavior.Outside of the occasional sentence here and there in the posts where you're also replying to me, I am not. I almost always skip over these kinds of arguments, whether it be between you two or you and the sisterposter or some other people.
>>129433619>So what the hell am I accused of?Today? A dishonest person who pretends to be someone other than himself and preferred to lie for hours before admitting it was himself and then continued arguing about it anyways because thats the sort of person he is. >>129433652Are you seriously watching this crap? Holy fucking cringe, and I mean that unironically. >@theamazingatheistI mean I don't know what to say norsebot, you're a fedora meme at this point. This guy is really stupid as well. I was raised Christian and hated every second of it, and even I don't bother sitting around screeching about a dying by-gone religion that is literally a completely lukewarm shell of itself no one believes in, not even Christians themselves anymore.
>>129434097>A dishonest person who pretends to be someone other than himselfWhat is the meaningful distinction between that and >about if you are pretending to be two people at onceThis?So, you agree that I can't be two people at once(since you said "despite fully knowing well that isn't what you are accused of.", I assume you realize I can't be different people at the same time in one single post), when I'm talking to someone else with uppercase letters, and replying to you with lowercase letters. So it logically FOLLOWS, that I'm not pretending to be someone else. Where am I wrong, exactly? Again, if you are accusing me of schizophrenia just say so. I never pretended to be someone else when writing with lowercase letters, it was obviously me all along, otherwise I wouldn't have used lowercase words in the same post that I use capitalized letters.>Are you seriously watching this crap?It's not even about atheism, but the idea that everything must be "logically pure", universe and laws of physics often contradicts itself, so does our flawed language, and so do all of us individually, failing to admit that is naive or dishonest. I only posted that video since you've always been acting like a infallible puritan. Sorry if bananas and fedoras scare you so much lol.
>>129434290>Where am I wrong, exactly?Honestly Nosebot I was assuming you were making excuses, but after your fedora youtube slop I'm wondering if you are legitimately unintelligent. Lets go through this like its kindergarten: 1) You have basically without saying so admitted that these are yourself: https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#q129422137 and https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129416250/#q1294221622) Neither of these posts are replying to multiple people3) We know you don't change grammar by accident, as proven by your very stict code of emulating sisterposter even down to his grammar4) You have no reason for changing your grammar in the posts of #1 besides wanting to pretend to be someone else. >failing to admit that is naive or dishonesThats a very nice platitude norsetourist, but unfortunately you have no ability to accept your own contradictions, nor do you reflect on them. You act superior to and attack people for believing the very same things you did mere months ago, and when the contradiction is brought up, how do you normally handle it? I'll tell you: usually you just don't greentext that part, if that fails you call them schizophrenic, if that fails you make up an excuse for why its ok. >flawed languageWell it is certainly extremely flawed when you are using it, that I agree with.
>>129434462>You have no reason for changing your grammar in the posts of #1 besides wanting to pretend to be someone else.I do have a reason, though.>you have no ability to accept your own contradictions, nor do you reflect on themI both accept them (without saying as much, because what's the point), and often reflect on them. A contradictions you caught so far for example, was that I used to dislike old hissy recordings. We're all full of contradictions in real life and that is precisely why I brought it up. You're the one being a puritan by excessively attacking irrelevant contradictions as if you are free of them.>You act superior to and attack peopleBut enough about you. Your entire persona can be summed up but this sentence. Whenever someone approaches me, I'm nothing but honest. You just keep shitposting as you normally do as evidenced by this conversation and you insisting on your paranoia.
>>129434620>I do have a reason, though.Thats true, you wanted to pretend to be someone besides yourself, because you prefer dishonesty and lies. Its ok, but maybe one day you can just admit that. >without saying as muchHilarious. In other words: you don't want to take responsibility for your actions, and you certainly don't want to openly admit the fault. Exactly like I said. >Your entire persona can be summed up but this sentence. Whenever someone approaches me, I'm nothing but honest.You are so ESL I can't even comprehend this incoherent pile of junk you wrote .
>>129434828>Thats true, you wanted to pretend to be someone besides yourselfI don't.>you don't want to take responsibility for your actionsI don't think I have responsibility of any sort, especially here on an anonymous board, as you will see from my post in the new thread. The only responibility I will take is for what I've said here and now, in this specific coversation, and maybe a week, a month ago, although on 4chan it shouldn't be apparent what I did say a week or a month ago, it often is in small generals, still, people here don't attack each other for changing their mind and/or "contradicting" themselves.>summed up but this sentence.by*
>>129434928>I don't.Well then explain, we're all waiting!>I don't think I have responsibility of any sort, I know! Thats my point!>by*Is that why you can't even stop yourself from making snide remarks about your "friend" being deaf because they didn't like your shitty Cortot slop?
>>129435186>Well then explain, we're all waiting!For the low quality posts, I stuck with lowercase letters, simply because they're low quality, and also alluding to our thought-police that left earlier, not because I'm a thought-police myself, but because you deserved it for all the garbage you posted.>why you can't even stop yourself from making snide remarks about your "friend" being deaf because they didn't like your shitty Cortot slop?Oh, you're condemning cheekiness now? All I'm trying to do is make him hear something I didn't hear initially. I did not insult him because he disliked Cortot.
>>129435453>For the low quality posts, I stuck with lowercase letters,You do nothing of the sort, you stick with lowercase for when you emulate sisterposter (as proven by the links) and thats the only time you do so, You are a disgusting liar. >Oh, you're condemning cheekiness now?No, because its not cheekiness, it was insulting someone being nice to you. I have no qualms about being rude to "nice" people, I even told him that I don't think he's very bright despite him being kind to me, but I'm also not pretending to be a good person unlike yourself. The difference between me and you is that I'm willing to admit to my character, you aren't.
>>129435542>You do nothing of the sort, you stick with lowercase for when you emulate sisterposterEveryone knows he's gone, and everyone knows it's me (the same person who posts with uppercase letters). >You do nothing of the sortThat is precisely what I do. You got the truth, but now you will keep this ridiculous conversation going anyway, because you're not interested in truth, you project your delusions and get fun out of meaningless conversations. So I won't drag this any longer.>I'm also not pretending to be a good person unlike yourself"Good" and "evil" are not objective truths, I suppose you'd know that by now. The term "good person" makes no sense to me whatsoever.
>>129435657>Everyone knows he's gone, and everyone knows it's meCompletely irreverent to the conversation. Are you too ESL to even understand whats going on?>That is precisely what I doIt is absolutely not, where is your lowercase for this https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/129082673/#129091113?Also look at this gem I found: https://desuarchive.org/mu/thread/126648409/#q126663646>How ironic, at least I don't live off of sistershitter's vocabulary HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA>"Good" and "evil" are not objective truths,No one said otherwise, no one implied otherwise, and you're starting a completely off tangent point to avoid dealing with the fact you don't perceive your negative traits as negative, but do perceive them as negative so long as you perceive them in others.
