Ravel editionhttps://youtu.be/sV1wCZ_RRIYThis 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: >>130350939
Kyung Wha Chung's Bachhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IWWwubgjy4&list=OLAK5uy_n8gDc0eQe-UOy1acArETs-7odl2HAsPI4&index=24
Watching a TV show and the opening is a guy gets murdered because he can't hear the bad guy break-in as he's listening to Handel on some sweet audiophile headphones. Lesson learned.
Give me your best "Resurrection" recording. Picrel is a cookie-cutter choice, but it's just such an impeccable recording. Absolutely everything went right and more.
>>130374638https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zUT18Zi6iw&list=OLAK5uy_mY7R96wVr8U06I4vkcL-M5skEp9gNxOnY&index=1also seehttps://www.musicweb-international.com/Mahler/Mahler2.htmalso super sekret pick, dont share with anyone else plshttps://files.catbox.moe/iz3tzh.flac
>>130374638Best: Fried (or Walter)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hDnCjsLpTYUsual pick: Klempererhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMd5LXU6GyA&list=OLAK5uy_n8DDA2GM-2mDbJJDHpnndGBa_oqYW8gD8&index=1
>>130374638The K-God did not record Mahler's 2nd so there unfortunately is no "best" recording.
>>130375020OsKar Fried DID record the 2nd though, thankfully, which may be the best Mahler recording out there along with Mengelberg's 4th and Walter's 9th (Vienna).
>>130375016That recording is fried alright.
>>130374638Mehta
>>130375036lel
>tfw no kubelik bach mass in b minorwhy livehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJc2HSnf6nAhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3iyjCZXkyYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_UJRtIXZPY
>>130375219>mass in b minordry counterpoint.
The kitty hears Chopin's Barcarolle playing softly in the distance, and through this experience comes face-to-face with the Platonic Form of Good. For the rest of her days, the kitty will spread the divine logos of God, eradicating materialist scum wherever she encounters them.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLjXQslVQc&list=OLAK5uy_nqgDxZbGccg2oB-ju4QQZRmPA5XsZ7qRQ&index=10
>>130375252>that linkKempff literally has a top-tier recording of every piece he touched.
Brahmshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKj2_5Eyh-Y&list=OLAK5uy_kCvrtv874evrv0_NM4KzwwvBl2Gg8aK74&index=3
>>130375252>>130375261>Kempffhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p26qXU23l1w
>>130375301That's it, you and me, behind the cafeteria during recess. You're done for, kid.
>>130375261>>130375235you people are so hyperbolic and dramatic
I'm running out of things to casually read and mindlessly browse on my phone while listening to classical music, and I don't want to stop listening to classical music. I might have to start doing chess puzzles or something. Or maybe I'll finally cross the threshold and become one of those cretins who reads actual books while listening to music.
>>130375361Anything less than proclaiming Kempff is God is underrating him, tbqhhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enuw9p0V5dc
>>130375375sure man whatever
>>130375364You're not actually listening if you're doing something else.
>>130375396It's not serious, anon, relax.
>>130375416Well, I'll accept 75-90% active listening compared to staring at a wall or sitting with my eyes closed for an hour or two.
>>130375442>75-90%I doubt it's that high.
>>130375364don't tell anyone but I mindlessly play league or dota while listening to classical
Bachhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkDfWkWvI18&list=OLAK5uy_mwq-KoSORIZ1phmVKtXznW5IrF1IO58q8&index=8
>>130375479you should kill yourself and I'm not joking at all
>>130375776what, little old me? kill myself? :(
>>130375442We've had this discussion many, many times. Reading while listening to music is, mechanically, just you rapidly switching which one gets attention. You aren't actually absorbing both at the same time.
>>130375479Why are men so retarded
speaking of...really frustrating to have so many incidental noises present in this recording, really takes me out of itare there any /classical/ recommended recordings?
>>130375955so women can't play video games? misogynist much?
>>130375974Herreweghe
>>130375479hey if it works for you
>>130375974Karl Richter, Jochumthen Karajan, Chailly, Pichonlots of great ones.
>Puccini—ToscaI'm gonna be honest: I didn't really get it.
>>130376501How about:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WRpRiEKFUUIf you don't get Puccini, you're not even human.
>>130376517I prefer:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb6ut1qRRa4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BtzZs-U0aIIf you don't get Lachenmann, you're not even human.
>>130375974That is one of the pieces that really changes from performance to performance so I recommend frequently trying new recordings. It's fun that way
>>130375479I listen while playing music-friendly games like Dwarf Fortress and Civ 4
>>130376536Awful. Not even comparable. Too monotonic and vulgar modernslop. At least trust Puccini, the man himself, who championed Martinelli.
>Fritz Wunderlich is "vulgar modernslop"We heave reached levels of contrarianism previously unimaginable
>>130376501Whaa-- what's to get? It's just a couple hours of beautiful music! You gotta try a couple different recordings of Tosca. Try Karajan'shttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ndUT-wXNS8&list=OLAK5uy_noqrnNW0r_YDXDa2OCYpRXlEYOH-s6qps&index=5
>>130376633Puccini would hate him. Do you at least understand that much, or are you just deaf?
>>130376570o_oah so this is the kind of postmodern 'classical' oft mocked in tv shows and novels
>>130376644I'm sorry but I can't read dead peoples' minds.
>Kempff's Goldberg Variationshttps://youtube.com/watch?v=EbYiaG_nkKMWhat the FUCK was he thinking
>>130376655bach and liszt
>>130376501because it's pretty much pop music
>>130375851yes, because you play League of Legends
>>130376694Retard alert
>>130376721puccini is exclusively enjoyed by people who don't listen to other classical music and who enjoy pop musical theatre (fact, not an opinion)
>>130375065I just pirated it from RT today and it's a great performance, but the version I got has a moment (during the massive drumroll in the climax of the 5th movemevent) where the track goes silent for almost 3 seconds, like when Spotify does when it switches tracks. It's an insane coitus interruptus and ruins the entire experience. And it's the only version available on RT.
>>130375479Nothing wrong with that, a lot of the activity is in the background and you can still concentrate on the music. I was listening to Das Lied today playing League, in fact.
>>130376703so dota is fine?
>>130376736Yet here I am, listening to classical music and not enjoying even a single pop song at this point, loving Puccini.
>>130376599>unironically playing Dwarf FortressEveryone point and laugh, a sperg!
Anyone Gianning their Schicchis?
>>130376753you're listening to pop if you're listening to Puccini
Circus music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voD5ww-jFvU&list=OLAK5uy_lDRGaqMDMrUR5_pQH9FCpz8jkEVseidnQ&index=4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZgd_M0HL-c&list=RDyZgd_M0HL-c&start_radio=1This looks like an interesting album and I do like they had the cheek to claim Stravinsky as an American composer
The slow movements are routinely the worst part of Mozart's symphonies. Just plain boring. Drudgery even.
BEST RECORDING OF PACHELBEL ORGAN WORKS?
newfag anon here. I listened to some more. so far I'm enjoyingKubelik - Dvorak 9th (close second is Bernstein's recording but Kubelik gives it life, makes me feel hundreds of things at once)Kletzki - Beethoven 5th (Kleiber's recording is on 2nd place)Klemperer - Beethoven 6th (Kletzki's recording is on 2nd place) - I listened to this a lot and love the slow 2nd movement, it does transport me back to my grandpa's orchard.Karajan - Sibelius' 5th - honestly this is where his technique shines the most, the wind instruments combine harmoniously with the strings and that wall drenched in texture is sublime. (2nd is David Colin Davis' recording - this sounds a lot more natural but for Sibelius I do prefer Karajan's recording) Bernstein - Mahler 1st (compared to 2nd place Kubelik which I see that he's some sort of klemperer due to taking his fucking time too much but not in a symphony like this)Not sure if this counts butWebern - Symphony, Op.21 (I know, it doesn't have the structure of a traditional symphony, it's more like a sonata) - I don't have a best recording because I was listening to pic rel for 4 hours trough the entire fucking day, it's mesmerizing.
>>130377924forgot to add:rec me more symphonies, all of these I grabbed from classical dot net in the basic repertoire and went to town.
>>130377940Brahms symphony no.4Rachmaninoff symphony no.2Mahler symphony no.5Tchaikovsky symphony no.6Schumann symphony no.3
>>130378024Uhh, sorry. Brahms 4th - Kleiber, only record I listened to, didn't enjoy it that much to be honest, maybe I'll look into a different recording. the rest I have to check out. thanks!
Schumann died a virgin
>>130378042That's okay, Brahms is among the most profound composers and honestly takes a while to truly understand.
>>130378045I heard that Yuja Wang is still a virgin
>>130377940Strauss AlpensinfonieLiszt FaustsinfonieFranck Sinfonie in d-MollBruckner Sinfonie Nr. 8Stravinsky Symphony of PsalmsJanacek SinfoniettaVaughan Williams London SymphonyHindemith Mathis der Maler Sinfonie
>>130378042Huh, I thought it was pretty accessible. It was love on first listen for me, specifically the first movement.
Best Mahrler 3?
>>130378092Is there anything this woman can't do?
>>130378134Kondrashin
>>130377924that Webern recording is actually very good lol. Good pick. Glad you enjoyed Op. 21
>>130378098well shit, looks like I'll be gone for a while lmao. >>130378106sadly for me it didn't do anything. love at first listen to me was Beethoven's Pastorale, I never thought that something this mellow yet technical yet soft and cuddly can exist.
>>130378138Have sex, apparently.
>>130378134Boult.
>>130378160>love at first listen to me was Beethoven's Pastorale,Interestingly I disliked that for a long time, but now I love it for sure. Maybe you just prefer major key/joyful music in general, Brahms 4 is rather mournful.
>>130378134Honeck
>>130377940Schumann 3 (Kubelik/BPO)
Rate my tone row:1: E2: F3: F#4: G5: G#6: A7: A#8: B9: C10: C#11: D12 D#
>>130378273done beforehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoK-Ru-_4K4
>>130378162Neither can this general
>>130378098funny story i had with the apline symphony, in undergrad i was chilling and drinking with some of the cohort and the tuba GA was there too bc he was cool as shithe puts on apline symphony while some of us are working on a music history project and when we're about to reach the summit he goes>GUYS GUYS GUYS GUYS WAIT WAIT->summit.png>UAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHhe blacked out shortly after
>>130376570If you don't like Lachenmann then you ain't black!
>>130375016I'm a hisster sister and everything, but I have literally never understood the appeal of Fried. And no amount of FRIED DESTROYS VERTICAL CONDUCTORS videos can change my opinion on him. Mengelberg mogs.
>>130378718>Mengelberg mogs.I concur, but he didn't record the 2nd so not sure what you mean. Fried and Walter are the only viable options. I really like Klemperer too, even though he's not as good as the other 2.
>>130379080I'm speaking generally, of course. Just compare Fried's Beethoven 9th with Mengelberg's, the former gets such a sloppy, unenthusiastic response from the orchestra. In general, I do not hear anything worthwhile from Fried's recordings, outside of maybe his Tchaikovsky 6th and maybe that Symphonie Fantasique. To my ear he's a good example of a historical curiosity that doesn't go much further than that.
Ahh, I can't stop listening to Puccini now. I wish I was an opera singer in 1920's, it sounds like a dream job.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoqrVzJLA54&list=OLAK5uy_mJjIYr0cosGa1mtIp6pIFtsAYGm67P1_E&index=1
Fantasia in D Minor, K. 397https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxmSJrzwNFk&list=RDAe6ctuy-1ic&index=5
Gouldlight Sonatahttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SCUHOCVm0o&list=RDAe6ctuy-1ic&index=7
>>130377940Schubert 9Haydn 88Mozart 41Beethoven 8Brahms 3Dvorak 8These are all works you were eventually going to hear anyway but I just wanna tell you to give Schubert 1 a try and then listen to the rest of them if you like it. His early symphonies are usually ignored (probably because most of his early work is generally less interesting than his later stuff. but his symphonies are an exception to this, I promise) but they are melodically just too fun.
<>I was definitely homophonically inclined until I was about 10Glen Gould
>>130378045Ravel too, yeah?I'm going to join that gang when my time comes.I am in blessed company.
>>130378045Which Schumann? Robert had children and literally died of STD.
Bachhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrnKrBvAn5U&list=OLAK5uy_lu0pQ3I647si_JuvgxLRMu6ezVZAcicY4&index=13
>>130377940Wuorinen 8Sessions 3Webern 1Piston 8Mennin 9Haydn 90enjoy :)
>>130380146Gould reached levels of shitposting that should not be possible.
>>130380235Troll-tier recs.
>>130376655Masterful rendition>for almost 40 years this has been one of my favorite goldberg recordings; i was delighted to find it rereleased on cd at last. as written, the variation sections should be played A.A:B.B, but Kempff plays them A.A:B as a concession to the time limits of the vinyl format in which this recording was first issued. this has the effect of giving each section a sense of impetus and climax while retaining the baroque repeated textures and the expansive vista of musical variations.>in the famous anecdote, the "goldberg" was supposedly composed to relax a wealthy patron before sleep. while that's likely mere legend, it does point to a style of interpretation -- refined, serene, subtle -- in which the legend can be taken seriously. it seems to me far less "historically objectionable" to apply the sostenuto or una corda pedals, as Kempff does, than to play the variations with the absurd speed, slapdash voicing and percussive, aggressive staccato that has become the modern "virtuoso" approach to this work. Kempff's touch is fluent, balanced and varied; his tempi in particular are beautifully judged (compare the opening aria to the manner in which it is usually performed today, dragging the tempo in the style of Glenn Gould's second recording). the voices are distinctive and clearly woven, and the tone of the piano is suitably clear, almost bell like. my one cavil is that DGG did not reproduce the original vinyl album cover of the patterns on a chladni plate.>i was playing the vinyl version of this recording on a summer afternoon long ago, when a friend came over. she stopped in the middle of the room, listened transfixed, and said, "what IS that? it's BEAUTIFUL!" yes, it really is.
>>130377940Just keep working down the list of top symphonies on that page.>>130377924Glad you like Webern.
>>130378134Bernstein (DG) or Chailly. If you like it a bit more taut, Kubelik or SalonenLately I've come to reevaluate my stance on it but for now that's what I'd answer.
Apparently Tiegerman has Brahms concerto no.2, wtf!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DkTWaGDzkoFirst two movements but, this has to to be the best rec of those movements. Probably even better than Backhaus.
now playinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY67wAZ9m1k
>>130380372damn
>>130380372>all that flutter and wow jesus christ this recording sounds awful
>>130380373Gershwin on LSD!
>>130378134There's never been a good Mahler 3
>>130380659*teleports behind you*https://files.catbox.moe/etg7hg.flac
>>130378134https://www.musicweb-international.com/Mahler/Mahler3.htm
>>130380659this
>>130380963are we supposed to recognize the recording?
>>130381066It's more fun waiting to see if the anon likes it first then ask which recording it is.It's Tennstedt.
>>130380980All garbage
>>130381076well I thought it was a bit too slow but that movement's tempo is not a deal-breaking requirement to how I measure a Mahler 3. Those would be the tempo and textures of the first movement (almost always taken too slowly), how audible the intro to the fourth movement is (very often literally inaudible instead of just quiet, which sucks), and the quality of the singer (bad singing in a Mahler recording means it goes straight into the trash).
>>130381085my rebuttalhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQi-xdXdlHc&list=OLAK5uy_nViWBq_Kgf_BfDpTu2qrsrwTrv082FydA&index=5
>>130381101I appreciate you know what you like.
1 minute bangerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0B6MaRRqS4c
Wagnerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylbus4QBXdk&list=OLAK5uy_lc4tBmw9CRUUx2fuNC42s8TLThpnilrrE&index=129
>>130381116I appreciate you appreciate I know what I like
'aldi is pure bliss
>>130382342This seems like a good recording for me. If it's 7 loose Vivaldi concerti that aren't in any of his big bundle OPs it would be a nice way to get them plus I like Pinnock's baroque stuff.
for me it's KKKKarajan (K-God), Kempff, Kempe
why did Mahler butcher Schumann's symphonies?
>>130383758says who? my rebuttals,https://files.catbox.moe/ifu619.flachttps://files.catbox.moe/aeyf5q.flacaint no butcher here
>>130383758>>130383830I swear I once found and posted a quote by Mahler where he said he hopes the Schumann re-orchestrations are considered a major part of his legacy down the line, but I haven't been able to find it since. The point is he took them very seriously, and thought he did a tremendous job.
>>130383830>>130383848i actually like his versions as much as the originals, actually i prefer them, in fact, fuck the originals, Mahler's revisions are much better in every way.
>>130383903thank you schizo
>>130383912hello, you're welcome, thank you too.
Scriabin Piano Sonata No. 5?
>>130383975one of the greatest ever
What do we think of Shostakovich's reorchestration of Schumann's cello concerto?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fu0P7pdXuBw
>>130384049what ?...
>>130384049damn Schumann getting re-orchestrated in every form loli'll have to check it out
>>130384049Anything over Schumann is better.
what do we think of Dvořák's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Elgar's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Walton's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Shostakovich's Cello Concertos?what do we think of Schumann's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Saint-Saens' Cello Concertos?what do we think of Joachim Raff's Cello Concertos?what do we think of Myaskovsky's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Martinů's Cello Concertos?what do we think of Hindemith's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Glière's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Bortkiewicz's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Vivaldi's Cello Concertos?what do we think of Haydn's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Bax's Cello Concerto?what do we think of CPE Bach's Cello Concertos?what do we think of Widor's Cello Concerto?what do we think of Villa-Lobos' Cello Concertos?
>>130384270all baseddon't forget Prokofiev's Symphony-Concerto too
>>130384270I doubt most people here would have listened to all the pieces you mentioned, even if they did I doubt they would be able to recall them. Music will either overpower your mind or fade away (if it is weak), there is no in-between. If the sound was not ingrained in your memory then it was not powerful enough. It was mediocre and there is no crime in discarding mediocre pieces. Some music is so powerful (Wagner for example) that it may even destroy your sense or perception of reality itself if not "used" carefully.Also 22nd of May, Wagner's Birthday. Respect, glory and honor to him.
I find it endlessly amusing the impetus behind Wagner's Ring is because he needed a prequal to his prequal to his prequal of Gotterdammerung, all of which was primarily to explain who this Siegfried guy is and how the events got set in motion.
>>130384270Haven't heard of the Riff, Bortkiewicz, or Widor ones. I'll definitely check them out now though. The rest are great but I really like Cello Concertos.
thanks for all the recs, now I'm listening to Brahms' 4th again but Haitnik's recording. >>130380344before deciding to try some classical, I was and I still am a huge Zappa fan, he enjoyed Varese and Webern but Varese seems too hard to grasp for me, Webern has a structure while Varese is just completely annoying to my ears for now.
>>130384568What's your primarily method for finding recordings? My favorite way is to search on Amazon (under the CD & Vinyl category) and the top results/page tends to be the most popular recordings. For example, you search 'brahms symphonies' and you get Klemperer, Karajan, Rattle, Solti, Barenboim, Abbado, and a couple stinkers like Gardiner and Seguin. You search "brahms symphony 4" and you get Jochum, Karajan, Walter, Abbado, Bernstein/Vienna (avoid!), Szell, Alsop, and then into the second page, Sanderling, Giulini, Previn, etc etc, you get the idea.Anyway, just an idea for a method you might want to try out. Occasionally you do get some stinkers because they're newer and being hyped, but that's what the reviews or asking on here is for, or comparing with what other review sites say (eg ClassicsToday, The Classic Review).In any case, hope you come to enjoy Brahms' symphonies!
>>130384624I use YTMusic (yes I pay for that shit for family plan) and I just search for Brahms 4 and I get lots of albums to choose from. First that came up was Kleiber, then Karajan, then Haitnik and so on. I pick the first one and then one at random. So far I'm enjoying this one. It's serene and calm, the first two movements so far are calm and serene, not at all that "sad" as I remember. I do sometimes google and get some TalkClassical ones but never had great success from their recs to be honest. Classics Today was recommended to me and I'm thankful because of Dave I got to listen to Kletzki's recordings of Beethoven.
>>130384379W (pbuh)
>>130384662>I use YTMusic (yes I pay for that shit for family plan)my brother! So do I. Make sure you go into the settings and check that your audio quality is set to high!And yeah that's another decent way. Problem is you get a lot of poor/mediocre recordings too, so that's best reserved for when you have a better recognition of the good performers and the ones you like. Then again I did it often at the start too, so whatever works!
>>130384686yeah, it's set to high since the beginning haha. I wanted to stick to the recs of classical dot net but they recommend some old as shit recordings. I wanted to try out Beethoven's piano sonatas and they recommended fucking Schnabel. I found a version on YT Music but the quality is just...I can't listen to it.
>>130384719>I wanted to try out Beethoven's piano sonatas and they recommended fucking Schnabel. I found a version on YT Music but the quality is just...I can't listen to it.based.
>>130384739I'll go with Brendel, Arrau and Gilels but first I'm going to listen to Brahms 4th one more time. I really enjoy Haitnik's recording so far. The second movement is beautiful, it is joyous and serious and strict at the same time. Not sure how I could dislike it at first listen.
>>130384841>Not sure how I could dislike it at first listen.Two things: one, sometimes it just takes a couple listens for even masterpieces to click. Two, it just goes to emphasis how important a particular recording is. Many masterpieces I didn't like on first listen until I tried a different recording. That's why I always say don't dismiss any acclaimed piece until you've tried at least a few diverse recordings.
>>130384860Thanks, I'll keep listening to more Brahms then.
>>130384719>I wanted to try out Beethoven's piano sonatas and they recommended fucking Schnabel.They recommend Schnabel for a good reason you know. Once you're a mature listener, you will realize they're right.
Backhaus (mono) >>>>> Schn*bel
>>130385290https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EX40OBOOWcM
>>130385310https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3kocKUF-h0
ClassicsToday changed their site format, hmmhttps://www.classicstoday.com/review/gil-shahams-winning-dvorak-and-coleridge-taylor-violin-concertos/
I'll admit, my usual stance on historical Ring sets is they're fun curiosities, often full of delightful singing and conducting, but the compromised sound quality ultimately make them forever inferior to, at minimum, the following generation of studio sets, (Bohm, Karajan, Solti), and maybe even the one after that (eg Barenboim, Goodall, Boulez, Levine, Janowski, iffy on Haitink). However, listening to the Kempe Ring lately, I've loved it so much, it's changed the way I view hiss recordings. So with that said, let's revisit the Krauss Ring, then we'll do the Furtwangler and Knappertsbusch.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vv_mjHlljtU&list=OLAK5uy_kbFjeT1RFNthkn8HVCiqtg9-p5GlSL3Ow&index=1Maybe hiss sets can be better than studio sets... now, I'm not saying the Kempe Ring is better than Bohm, Karajan, Solti, Barenboim, et al., I'm not gonna go that far, but it's close, it definitely compares.
>I do not know how exactly many Ring cycles are available but I would guess at least thirty, and I offer the following brief evaluation on the understanding that I make no claims to comprehensiveness; this is a personal survey of the eighteen cycles in my own collection. I candidly admit to having discounted several cycles from the 80’s by Haitink (1988-90), Levine (1987-90), Janowski (1980-82), Boulez (1980), as that was decidedly not a Golden Age of Wagner singing, nor have I included the recent, live cycle from Jaap van Zweden on Naxos, as I do not share the enthusiasm some MusicWeb colleagues have expressed for this set as “truly a Ring for our age”; I fear that to me that does not sound like a compliment. I have heard, even owned and then discarded them all because I honestly do not think that their casts can hold a candle to the artists in earlier recordings. Nor does their superior stereo or digital sound necessarily present any advantage, in that it only reveals even more distinctly the vocal inadequacies of the singers compared with those of the immediate post World War II generation. When I want to hear that marvellous music, it is to recordings from the mid-50’s and 60’s in particular that I turn, because that was the era which gave us stereo sound but could also still stage a Wagner opera with stellar voices, whereas many previous recordings are superbly performed but sonically compromised by being in live mono. Hence the most recent cycle here was recorded a generation ago and all the others are even older, being pre-1980. ---- Ralph Mooredamn> Nor does their superior stereo or digital sound necessarily present any advantage, in that it only reveals even more distinctly the vocal inadequacies of the singers compared with those of the immediate post World War II generation.is an especially savage line
>>130385273I can't see how even a seasoned/veteran listener can enjoy those recordings, I listened to some old shit from Furtwangler, that was tolerable but Schnabel's recordings are horrible.
>>130386049The problem with those really old recordings is that you already need to know what the piece sounds like to pick up on what the oldtimers are doing differently. Listen to this really short example and you'll get it:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gco_v-jm_68https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkxKCW8nq0Y
This might be a stupid question but how is it one professional orchestra can sound better than other on a recording? Surely any differences in talent and skill in individual musicians are masked by a section playing in tandem. Is it quality of instruments? Or what?
>>130386049For now, don't force it. Once you start to become well-versed in the standard repertoire and a wide quantity of recordings, then yeah, start to check out the historical stuff, but for now, don't worry about it.
>>130386113>Surely any differences in talent and skill in individual musicians are masked by a section playing in tandem.Not really. Also there are typically only one or two trumpets, only one or two oboes etc. But the main difference is usually the conducting.
>>130386113>Surely any differences in talent and skill in individual musicians are masked by a section playing in tandem.A group of bad players with mask a good player, a group of good players will mask a bad player. Listen to a truly atrocious orchestra and this will be obvious.
>>130386245I meant more, a section of 9/10 string players in a top-tier orchestra and a section of 6-7/10s in a regional orchestra, you would think in aggregate the skill difference kinda evens out, that individual talent and nuance is smoothed away, so what exactly is it that makes the former sound better than the latter? Why does the Vienna Phil sound better than, say, the Saarbucken RSO?
>>130386275You probably just don't understand how difficult playing an instrument and how vast the difference between a 6/10 and a 9/10 player is.
>>130386318Hardly. I can fully understand that a soloist 9/10 will sound much better than a 6-7, even 8/10. My issue is the tone and sonority of 10 string musicians playing together should combine and even out much of the differences in skill. Maybe I'm wrong about that.
>>130386334Would ten 3/10 string players even out?
>>130386346I don't knnow about even out, but whereas a 3/10 singing on its own will kinda suck, ten 3/10s singing in a group begins to sound good. This is why every group of Christmas carolers or random church choir still sounds, even at worst, decent. The harmony smooths out the flaws. Are you getting my point now?
>>130386113>>130386275>Why does the Vienna Phil sound better than, say, the Saarbucken RSO?First of all, they use different instruments. Vienna is especially famous for their 'warm' string, which has mostly to do with the instruments themslves, but not only, techniques also matter. The most obvious example is Stokowski:>On the musical side, Stokowski nurtured the orchestra and shaped the "Stokowski" sound, or what became known as the "Philadelphia Sound".[11] He encouraged "free bowing" from the string section, "free breathing" from the brass section, and continually altered the seating arrangements of the orchestra's sections, as well as the acoustics of the hall, in response to his urge to create a better sound.And also Mengelberg, you can hear the most distinctive portamenti on his recordings (such as Mahler 4 or 5 adagietto). Old conductors are also known for their rubato and textutal transparency (favoring polyphonic textures over the vertical, homophonic textures), this has to do with voicing as well as phrasing, technique etc.This is just the top of the iceberg.
>>130386382Higher (or different) quality of instruments and specific techniques makes sense, thanks, especially in regards to sonority, like warmth or edginess or clarity (ex. Gewandhaus).
>>130386382lots of words to say that it is 100% the conductor
>>130386414Karajan conducting a regional orchestra doesn't make them sound like the BPO automatically, there are clearly other differences, else praise for orchestras would make no sense.
>It is a genuine pleasure to hear a conductor like Böhm who does what Wagner says and refuses to drag his way through the score. In so many places, you look at the score and you see that Böhm really does justice to what Wagner has written. The results are totally electric throughout - am emotional roller coaster ride, plunging helplessly towards its inevitable tragic conclusion. The faster tempi almost certainly represent the influence of Richard Strauss on Böhm. Strauss, who was an assistant conductor at Bayreuth in 1898, once stated in response to the suggestion that his tempi were fast that:>"It's not me who is faster in Parsifal, but it's you lot in Bayreuth who are getting ever slower. Believe me, it is really wrong, what you are doing in Bayreuth."based. Was he right? Is Wagner supposed to be fast, lean, and taut?fromhttps://thinkclassical.blogspot.com/2012/02/overview-of-recordings-of-ring.html
Is the Roth quartet's Art of Fugue the only SQ version worth a damn? Every other quartet is so choppy and borderline irritating.
>>130386599Have you tried the Casals one?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLpJZWukDiY&list=OLAK5uy_me9d2cIco56aNbBOHhgHjiFrrRSUuVIRU&index=4By choppy I'm gonna assume you're most certainly talking about the Juilliard Quartet release. So that leaves the ones by the Keller Quartet and Delme Quartet.Kellerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBthOMRViTw&list=OLAK5uy_mk5uCqmFB5lR-eUyJCO504YwvCt66QXCc&index=8Delmehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=952DaqaFWTE&list=OLAK5uy_k0e5ZYFpn5nMzyi8CM8L5vJcA3T60Zb7s&index=6Hopefully you love one of these! Oh, there's also the one by the Emerson Quartet but I assume you've already tried it.
>>130386635>Casals>Keller>DelmeTerrible. Choppy.>I assume you've already tried itI did, it's choppy, as are all the others you listed, but somehow they're even worse than Emerson and Julliard, since they're HIP. I'm looking for old school performance with talent and skill put into it.
>>130374638Michael Tilson Thomas with the SFO 2004https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y48AO3KvR3o&list=PLEc_yFh-r2EgcMSYyKMW4WSCVRqPX81Gl
>>130386686Well, I've got no others to suggest. What I can recommend instead though is I think you'd really enjoy Haydn's Seven Last Words of Christ in string quartet form. Lots of ensembles have recorded that, especially some heavily romantic ones like my beloved Borodin Quartet.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-qznJ7t4hY&list=OLAK5uy_nyLgds9TFLup_66VYKEdqxmPEn9tP1dLQ&index=1
>>130386802Thanks for the rec.
Dave Hurwitz calls Nelsons' Mahler 5 "atrocious"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqnyckB5Ts0
>>130387448old news
speaking of new Mahler, Vasily Petrenko's recording of Mahler's 3rd just dropped today, get it while it's hot! One of the great conductors working today. His recordings of Russian symphonies are among the best ever made (eg Rachmaninoff, Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, Scriabin), so it's nice to see him bring his talents to the rest of the symphonic repertoire!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-ibHkM3uyc&list=OLAK5uy_nFbrWwP-zAMRcCF0UqWOhqNV6fFY6oroE&index=1
>>130387448It's the first release in what's going to be a complete cycle too! As far as I'm concerned, the more cycles the better. If you want a good recent one, check out Semyon 'Lohengrin' Bichkov/Czech Phil.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4Mr09czXU&list=OLAK5uy_kfWJspr5hfj-l90N68iw9iVtb8xWq5RD0&index=21
>brahms 1:p>brahms 2:)>brahms 3:D>brahms 4:Oall nice and in orderhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mq2T8dJGZn8
So now that the dust has settled, which of these two ranks as the greatest Violin Concerto of all-time:Brahmshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVC_JXoK7Uo&list=OLAK5uy_kITnLGuDyuPlSxp8_se1yDCHaeAHBhkJc&index=1orTchaikovskyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTudKe17VWA&list=OLAK5uy_mqRLa25YJMwEMqOpyIimO-n-lqsRSR6AE&index=1bonus recording: the famous (for good reason!) Reiner/Heifetz recording which contains brilliant performances of both,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSiQH09zhLEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxGp1Ii4r8M
>>130387679The greatest Violin Concerto of all-time is obviously Mendelssohn.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUjF7T15-gA
>>130387609Brahms 1: An artist failureBrahms 2: Most boring symphony in the worldBrahms 3: Weird but interestingBrahms 4: A masterpiece
>>130387729Cliche, but Mendelssohn's VC is indeed great.
>>130387729>>130387679I really enjoy Saint-Saens violin works. The part where the whole orchestra steps in gives me the shivers.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3r_9dKNqWHg
>>130387770This. Except 1st is kinda cool.
>>1303881441st is cool but it's still an artistic failure and I think Brahms knew that.
the new classicstoday website does not let you search for the name of a specific piece. what a fucking joke.
>>130387609Brahms 1 never clicked for me but I love the others, especially 3.
>>130383848the originals aren't even that good why did he waste his time reorchestrating fucking Schumann of all people
>>130385273no mono recording should ever be recommended
>>130386480how long was his Parsifal?
>>130389172It's funny how Tchaikovsky, who was an absolute god in orchestration, was such a big fan of Schumann.
>>130389172Fuck off you retard. Schumann 3 is one of the greatest symphonies.
>>130389025I don't get how people prefer Brahms 3 over 4, the first movement of the 3rd is absolutely mid compared to the 4th.
>>130389381https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53rKaD0_BKI
>>130389412https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=va-8EzYUucI
>>130389381I think they both have great first movements and I like 3's more
>>130389172Maybe that's the point? Mahler reorchestrated Schumann because he saw the potential.
>>130389552They probably meant it wasn't that good regardless of orchestration, which is obviously wrong, Rhenish is only next to top Mahler symphonies. Mahler knew that.
>>130389658>top Mahler symphoniesso "alright" at most, got it
>ywn hear Mahler conducting Rach piano concerto 3 with Rach playing piano
>>130389982Might as well kill myself right here and now
Bachhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqDvFZ-ZdhU&list=OLAK5uy_lLvlLMeZ8iJeU5A-5G-SZKx8Fi_7yeMis&index=11
>>130389982Listen to the Gieseking and Mengelberg Rach concerts. Probably the closest you'll get.
Liaten to classical music was a social activityNot it is a solitary activityThat completely changes the symbolic value of classical music.
Do I need to have read Hegel to be able to appreciate Celebidache's recordings?
>>130389172>Lunching with Rosé and Natalie after the concert, Mahler enthused about Schumann's 'marvellous' symphonies. He could not understand why Wagner had underestimated, and indeed condemned them. 'Perhaps he had heard a bad, "incomprehensible" performance that gave him the wrong impression. In any case, he has caused a lot of harm by prejudicing most of his followers who even today are stupid enough to look down their noses at Schumann and make fun of him.'
Liaten to classical music was background entertainment at aristocrat partiesNow it is appreciated as high art by people from all strata of societyThat completely changes the symbolic value of classical music.
>>130390116you should skip Celibidache. t. from gyppostan
>... so I said, is that a bassoon or a buffoon?>*laughtrack*
rubbing my ears after listening to a Mahler symphony like a fat guy rubs his belly after eating a three course meal
The Gould Tempered Listenerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9i_JWDOFvY
>>130389918Mahler is the greatest austro-German and the greatest symphonist in the multiverse.>>130389982Tru>>130390084Gieseking is not a great pianist. Rach's own recordings are much better.
>>130390065The classic German Ms Paint style
>>130390143Humm.
Should I watch a movie or listen to Mahler's 6th? Haven't decided on the movie yet.
>>130382342Better than Vivlidl for sure
>>130390475>Rach's own recordings are much better.Why?
>>130390132well both Mahler and Schumann are melodramatic drama-queens in their music so it makes sense he's like them I guess
>>130390116you need to be pretentious as fuck to enjoy Celibidache
>>130390598neither. you should listen to an Ockeghem mass.
>>130391126When I was into Ockeghem I definitely liked him more than Mahler
>>130390642Rachmaninoff's own performance is much better than Gieseking's dry, vertical, anti-bel-canto rubato.
>>130391250>dry, vertical, anti-bel-canto rubato.What does that mean?
Wagner anime credits https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu56CLfFx5M&list=RDnu56CLfFx5M&start_radio=1
>>130391258Synchronized hands, metronomic phrasing. Gieseking isn't bad, he's just not in the Rachmaninoff league.
>erm actually it's bad to play in timepeople actually believe this?
>Rach's favorite conductors to work with were Nikisch, Mahler, Mengelberg, and Fiedler>However, he was not very fond of Furtwangler>Not paying attention to Furtwängler, who was rehearsing a symphony, Rachmaninoff sat down at the piano, looked at his watch, and thunderously struck a few chords. Perplexed, Furtwängler stopped. He looked at Rachmaninoff, who showed his watch and said, ‘My rehearsal time was ten-thirty.’ With no further exchange the rehearsal of the concerto commenced. After five minutes or so, Rachmaninoff walked to the conductor’s stand and began to conduct. The orchestra had two conductors – Furtwängler, bewildered, and Rachmaninoff, swearing in Russian.
>...so your mother says you're into classical?>I prefer to call it Rach 'n Roll>*laughtrack*
https://youtu.be/Y-8UY81DSTwI feel like I'm experiencing Beethoven sonata no. 15 for the first time. He plays it in a way that makes it so new for me. Gotta download all of Moravec's Beethoven
>>130391350Gold.
>...so Nick said the funniest thing the other day when addressing the class of students, he says-- nah, you say it man!>Alright alright -- so I was up there in front of all the students, and one of the kids asked a question lamenting the quality of today's conductors and musicians.>Right.>So I said, "It's true today's conductors and musicians are worse than the last generation's. But hey, on the bright side, at least they're better than the next generation's!">*laughtrack*
>>130391682He does a very good 26th sonata
>>130391682That's pretty good. I've always felt the opening of the 15th is one of the greatest in all of the solo piano repertoire.
>In his autobiograpy A MINGLED CHIME, Sir Thomas Beecham cited "the old maxim that metaphysics and the theater, especially the lyric theater, hardly ever go comfortably hand in hand, as Strauss...discovered in the case of his WOMAN WITHOUT A SHADOW." Now, taken as a rule, this proposition "puts paid" to almost all of Wagner, and - for all his earthiness - a good chunk of Verdi. Still, Sir Tommy was not wrong - at least, in gauging what an operatic audience of his time could digest. Not to mention the staggering scenic, orchestral and vocal challenges posed by DIE FRAU OHNE SCHATTEN. So we are not talking about another night of TOSCA - or even ROSENKAVALIER. But to the generations following the popularity of J.R. Tolkien, dungeons-and-dragons, Avitar and all sorts of outer space epics, the metaphysics of DIE FRAU OHNE SCHATTEN could hardly constitute the skull-cracking conundrum it may have been to the average, early-to-mid 20th century opera-goer.>In spite of its densely symphonic nature, and given the fabled "heaviness" and "tortuous mental processes" of Hugo von Hofmannthal's libretto, DIE FRAU is dominated by a BEL CANTO melos. And throughout its span, the music of DIE FRAU brings to life, and deeply humanizes, the characters and the metaphysics of this "abstract" work...In which an ethereal Empress, married to the human Emperor of an "Eastern Kingdon", must acquire a shadow, or he will turn to stone - and which ends, amid chasms and waterfalls, with an off-stage chorus of unborn children (seriously).>("Shadow" = the ability to bear children, and human-ness - shades of Jung, even if von Hofmannthal's "Shadow" is human-ness "in general", and Jung's is the unacknowledged "underside" which needs to be integrated with the rest of the "self"...But never mind, just read the libretto.)What in God's name is this opera-schizo talking about??? There's even more paragraphs here in the top review,https://www.amazon.com/Strauss-Die-Frau-ohne-Schatten/dp/B00000E47A
>>130391299>Synchronized hands, metronomic phrasingso good playing
I'll let you all in on a secret: Rachmaninoff's The Bells has the power to save the world,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPD7CLBTdwU&list=OLAK5uy_nHomFiIjoe9uRxJ0HUNeqNT1WTKlVsuEc&index=1
Prokofiev: Romeo and Juliet Suite No. 2, Op. 64tehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LVmH4bwH3Q&list=RD-LVmH4bwH3Q&start_radio=1Doesn't 'sound' a thing like Romeo and Juliet
has anyone else had this phenomenon where after months of listening to mainly late-Romantic composers, everything pre-1840's just sounds so basic and boring
>>130391841>Doesn't 'sound' a thing like Romeo and JulietThe modernists gonna do as the modernists do.If you want something that sounds like R&J, might I suggest Tchaikovsky's delightful symphonic poem,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IG11UYr0ng>>130391860truthough I did manage to get back into Beethoven :3
>>130391860No.
>>130391841>>130391872just read R&J, no musician has ever successfully translated Shakespeare into music (trust me, I looked).inb4 Mendelssohn's soundtrack to Midsummer (that's not "translating Shakespeare into music" like I meant because it is specifically written to be played WITH a staged performance, not on its own)
>>130391907have you tried Sibelius' The Tempest?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-0-WUExCx0
>>130391860no, but the opposite has happened
>>130391907Elgar's Falstaffhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H41DlTA8bMY
I would sacrifice the entire musical corpus of Mozart for another symphony by Elgar.
I would sacrifice the entire musical corpus of all of Britain for another opera by Mozart.
I would sacrifice the entire British musical apparatus Don't need anything, would just sacrifice them
>>130391820Incorrect.
What is Prokofiev anyway? What would you call that kind of music?
>>130391860Yep. Happens to all.
>>130392072No, it doesn't.
>>130392069Modernist.
>>130392069https://youtu.be/SK2G5JX_ucYThe goofy JRPG village populated by a comic relief race
>>130391860the reverse is actually way more common where if you listen to months of mainly baroque and classical composers, everything post-1840s just sounds so neurotic and hysterical
>>130392122That's too vague, since that seems to include Stavinsky or 12 tone music
>>130392143Yeah, modernism was diverse but mostly either neoclassical or SVS-style. Prokofiev is the former.
>>130391860No, I can never get into the late Romantic quite as much as pre-1840s music.
>>1303918601840 is when music started more or less. There is some pre credit stuff like things by Beethoven but in general it's true
>>130392059if you're a gay romantic maybe
>>130392179you shouldn't be here
>tfw only one Debussy operawhy live
Prokofiev Scythian Suitshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtVgWzXGvj4&list=RDHtVgWzXGvj4&index=1
new Volodos recording dropped last week, featuring Schubert's D. 850 and Schumann's Kinderszenen.Schubert: Piano Sonata in D Major, D. 850https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T3lnLlKxbw&list=OLAK5uy_nZTqro3w8vwS8tsH0douykcXXpltAg9UU&index=2Schumann: Kinderszenen, Op.15https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7Lx1Y885LU&list=OLAK5uy_nZTqro3w8vwS8tsH0douykcXXpltAg9UU&index=5review,https://theclassicreview.com/album-reviews/arcadi-volodos-schubert-schumann/
>>130392453The two schus
>>130392382>tfw no Schubert concerto
Barenboim made Furtwangler obsoletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJKpfDn4_oc&list=OLAK5uy_kM-8lEVmNr9ReH0FHmfP-rBHWzWkkWe1s&index=4
>>130392558I remember when I first got into classical, I thought every major composer had at least one piece in every standard form, so when I tried searching for a Schubert Cello Sonata or Piano Concerto or Violin Concerto on YouTube, I thought it was a mistake, and every so often I'd try searching again, lol. Oh, and I avoided clicking on his Arpeggione Sonata (for cello) even though it kept popping up when searching for his Cello Sonata, featuring Yo-Yo Ma, because I didn't know what the hell an Arpeggione was. Eventually I did though, lol.
>>130392558>>130392620I thought it was a mistake when none came up*
>conducted by Kurt Masurdismissed
>>130392655some of his Mendelssohn is pretty good
I don't want to name names but I don't understand how some of these modern big-budget releases can be mixed so poorly. It almost makes me want to believe the issue is with my sound system instead, because no way DG would release such a big deal recording sounding like garbage. Like you would think these producers and engineers at the big labels kinda know all of the do's and don't's, so how do you end up with such a shoddy result?
Bach's prelude in g for violin just doesn't end, it just keep going
>>130392983the ride never ends.
>>130383975mogged by 6 and 8still great though, obviously
>>130392562if he has a better bruckner then i will agree>>130392983nor should it
>tfw favorite performance of a piece WOULD be in great sound but the mic somehow managed to recording every chair creak and sneeze and cough in the audiencethere's so much noise during the quiet parts, FUCK
>>130392112Yes, it does.
>>130393038fuck I wanted the cropped screenshot of the hopeless horse and picked
>>130393045Half the responses are disagreeing with you.
Scriabin sonatas:1 and 8: Ashkenazy2, 3, 7 and 10: Ruth Laredo4: Hamelin5: Robert Taub6: Ohlsson9: Bernd Glemser
>>130393067No, they're just not there yet. Yes, even those claiming it's "reverse" are actually lagging behind.
>>130393067don't bother, he is a romantard and as such suffers from a slowed mental development
>>130393038At least there's no one in the audience screaming "WOO Firebird!"
>>130393119>t. still lagging behind thinking pre 19th century is worth a damnI envy you. I wish I could enjoy not listening to Mahler and Reger. Hell, I wish I was back in my pop days, I was much more fascinated back then come to think of it.Ignorance is bliss.
>>130393080Not familiar with Taub's but the rest are solid choices.
>>130393149what makes you think I will read this
The Wagner edition approaches...
What's the point of music if it's not hysteric
>>130393282what a doltish question.
>>130393214Every thread is a Wagner edition...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw6LkUP1apE&list=OLAK5uy_kXXXjqlVgZ0s0Tk_nM1rWpxv8SZe6ciwY&index=4
I've been doing a lot of thinking lately.
>>130392127>the reverse is actually way more commonThe reverse is extremely rare and/or non-existent. People who keep listening to classical music always end up going back to Beethoven and music afterwards, be it opera or chamber music.
I want to die listening to Rossini, Wagner or Strauss. Sounds cooler than dying listening to Haydn, Scarlatti or Purcell tbqh
>>130393398that can be arranged.
>>130393415Lmao
>>130393149>>130393358What is with you people trying to insist on a universal class of experience? I could halfway buy it if you just said baroque and Renaissance rather than trying to smuggle Haydn and Mozart into this when they are much more stylistically continuous with Romantic music (and were actually considered 'Romantic' in their day). If anything the natural converse to BABIAA is exclusively listening to Haydn through to Mahler.
>>130393347About what
>>130393436No one mentioned Haydn and Mozart you schizo
NEW:>>130393449>>130393449>>130393449
>>130393454Beethoven and afterwards excludes Mozart and Haydn.
W>>130393449>>130393449>>130393449>>130393449
>>130393438I will answer your question in the next thread.
>>130393472....and? Where did I ever mention those two?
>>130393497You agreed with a post stating that listening to anything pre-1840s sounds basic and boring, so either you would include Haydn and Mozart in that or at the very least you don't consider them worthy enough of mention that you modified the judgment to include the classical period. Or you didn't read the post before agreeing with it.
>>130393595I still don't see how I was "trying to smuggle Haydn and Mozart" into it. Maybe you should just take meds?
>>130397201Because if you think all pre-1840s music is basic and boring, that includes Haydn and Mozart, obviously.
>>130397261Sure. I still don't get when I ever tried to "smuggle Haydn and Mozart" but not, say, Josquin? Maybe it's time for meds?
>>130397446Because two of those wrote in forms directly historically continuous between the classical and Romantic periods and the other did not.
>>130397493 And? All of them composed with the same countrapuntal techniques, voice leading and similar harmony.Baroque forms are likewise continuation of renaissance music and classical forms a continuation of baroque forms.
>>130397602So you simultaneously want to smooth over distinctions across musical history on the basis of various gradual and granular differences but also argue that the Austro-German classical forms are so discontinuous with music after 1840 that it's reasonable to reject everything prior. Okay
>>130397603>but also argue that the Austro-German classical forms are so discontinuous with music after 1840 that it's reasonable to reject everything prior.They are not "so discontinuous" but they are different, as all periods are. I don't get what's so difficult to understand here.
>>130397619What is difficult for me to understand is that you are censuring me for pointing out that there is a strong, continuous evolution of specific musical forms that were iterated upon during the classical and Romantic periods that make me suspicious of claims that one would love Romantic music to the complete exclusion of classical, while simultaneously arguing the same point as me re: Josquin or whoever else.
