Chad Schumann editionhttps://youtu.be/VELPD6FVylAThis 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: >>131197850
First for short king Wagner
>mfw Brahms' Hungarian Dances for pianohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJS0pHvDX4c
Johann Baptist Joseph Maximilian Regerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0jlvKMbw7chttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhfnOK45Z1chttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJIloeJtObgThe Concerto is a typical yet what might also be called tragic case of a ‘sleeping giant’ in Reger’s output. It is also the ‘Cinderella’ in the impressive series of violin concertos from Beethoven’s Op 61 to Schoenberg’s Op 36. Reger wished above all to pay homage to, and at the same time go one better than, this German tradition, to which the last great contribution was in his view Brahms’s Violin Concerto. On 9th June 1907 Reger announced to his publisher: “I am confident that this violin concerto is imbued as it were with the ‘classical’ sensibilities of our time, and that it contains no ‘crazy ideas’. There is no technical ‘nonsense’ to be found in the solo violin part; what becomes apparent is an ideal of scoring that may be described as ‘transparent’, adding “I hope I have ensured that the soloist, who is allocated so much cantilena, will be able to concentrate on ‘singing’ and need not ‘scratch’! The style is a symphonic throughout to be sure. Of course I have also considered the virtuoso element for the soloist, however not in an exaggerated fashion. Instead I have placed the emphasis on a strong melody, and done the same in the two allegro movements.” >[...]over and above its intellectual, compositional aspirations, the art of Reger remains a natural phenomenon, which can deploy its calm grandeur only in the simultaneity of line and colour, of structure and expression.
>>131231293damn it I forgot a >
>>131228651I try to listen to it every eight or so cycles through the rest of the operas.
>favorite composer lately?>favorite piece(s)?>which composer is the biggest meme?>tea or coffee?
>>131231293I gotta admit, while I've been enjoying Reger on the whole, I listened to the piano concerto and violin concerto and not a single moment was memorable or even good. They're almost like what I'd expect an advanced AI or an army of bugmen attempting to imitate the greats to compose. No offense to "Reger; Max Reger" of course.
>>131231680>Beethoven>all of them>Beethoven>Cocaine
>>131231706>not a single moment was memorableharsh but fair>even goodharsh and a bit unfair
>>131231680>Damase >Midsummer nights dream overture>Liszt >Covfefe
dafdc#def:)
Beethoven is very good, but he seems to get lost among the other composers. Every composer has that intrinsic style that characterizes each work, Beethoven doesn’t seem to have that quality (perhaps it’s the way he develops his works, but I’m thinking of something more sentimental). In the end, it seems he was simply remembered as the one who broke with tradition, and that was it.
>>131232018are you fucking stupid
>>131231763>harsh and a bit unfairI'd say it's passable all the way through with a few decent parts.
>>131232018>Beethoven is very good, but he seems to get lost among the other composers. Every composer has that intrinsic style that characterizes each work, Beethoven doesn’t seem to have that quality (perhaps it’s the way he develops his works, but I’m thinking of something more sentimental). In the end, it seems he was simply remembered as the one who broke with tradition, and that was it.This is so good. It's going to drive people insane.Saving to re-post whenever Beethoven is named.
>>131232119I enjoyed it so much on first listen I immediately looked up two more recordings to compare and am currently listening to the first of them
>>131232337Hmm, well I'm glad you did. I guess I'll give both of them another try.
>>131232346I'd commend you if you did, but perhaps don't be in a hurry to do so like me, since you had such an unfortunate first impression. Let the memory of it fade a bit, almost forget about it even: see if serendipity does you any favours. You know, distance makes the heart, etc
Whenever I search up 'beethoven violin sonatas' in my music streaming service to find an unfamiliar set to try, I always leave a bit sad because many of the results are newer sets by musicians I've never heard of, sets I will never listen to because there's just not enough time to try them all. There's not even enough time to listen to all of the sets by the musicians I *have* heard of! and those are the ones I will be clicking on.
>>131232363Serendipity, eh? Like I see a qt on the bus listening to Reger's Violin Concerto so I pretend I love it and it's so underrated?
>>131232377...no?
>>131232384...oh. Because that would be quite the confluence of events. A sign from the universe, if you will.
did you peep this new 3 hour Bolet set yet?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cgmyl5gA60U&list=OLAK5uy_mYwjqY9k_e_jZPSsScF_BfSYpevg3z_Vs&index=20
>>131232391you don't know what serendipity means, do you
>>131232412The felicitous confluence of events which makes me love Reger's Violin Concerto.
>>131232422alright, whatever works
>>131232412Like rain on your wedding day or somethin'...?
TRIIIIIIIIISTAAAAAN
now playingstart of Bax: Nonethttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRa0OFxcX7Q&list=OLAK5uy_kh7iTQu6x-FWG65Tw3LIa_r51tVwKxdGo&index=2start of Bax: Oboe Quintethttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INreLCEYWpY&list=OLAK5uy_kh7iTQu6x-FWG65Tw3LIa_r51tVwKxdGo&index=4Bax: Elegiac Triohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WinuI6sFvOY&list=OLAK5uy_kh7iTQu6x-FWG65Tw3LIa_r51tVwKxdGo&index=7start of Bax: Clarinet Sonatahttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6ElaIDJ2h4&list=OLAK5uy_kh7iTQu6x-FWG65Tw3LIa_r51tVwKxdGo&index=8Bax: Harp Quintethttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysYNvPcbImA&list=OLAK5uy_kh7iTQu6x-FWG65Tw3LIa_r51tVwKxdGo&index=9youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kh7iTQu6x-FWG65Tw3LIa_r51tVwKxdGo&si=fOKn2KY6dl2EzWsC>This is a very generous collection of the chamber works of Arnold Bax (1883-1953), one of the 20th century favorites of Anglophile music lovers. If you like Bax's late-impressionist style, it's a very attractive collection indeed. The performances are all extremely well played, and the musicians sound as though they had been playing these pieces for years instead of having learned them for a recording session. Hyperion's recording is typically vivid as well. In sum, presuming the music appeals, this is a flawless disc. --Leslie GerberNice variety of chamber works, and you can't ever go wrong with The Nash Ensemble.
>>131231153Schumann? This is the dude from No Country For Old Men
damn the finale of Bruckner 5 is crazyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj-C-Ykxi0g&list=OLAK5uy_m2Hgs0sDbLzKcK84XswdQr4cdrmDcW0SI&index=4
Can't tell if most recordings of Bach's Keyboard Partitas, French Suites, and English Suites are dull or I just don't like them that much.
>>131234494The French and English Suites are not that remarkable, but if you don't like the Partitas you definitely just haven't found the right recording yet.
>>131234529The Partitas are odd because they sound nice but I find myself turning them off three-to-ten minutes in like 99% of the time, which is generally the tell of my true feelings for a piece.
>>131232018His style is what Chopin, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms and every single romantic composer inherited, expression and freedom. Composers before Beethoven writing for keyboards had nearly 0 expression, Beethoven on the other hand, autistically wrote every detail down, dynamic markings from ppp to fff, all kinds of articulations, radical tempo changes etc. He also had access to a more flexible keyboard instrument than anything before, which helped his case. And his handling of forms went from formalistic, Haydnesque simplicity to long emotional narratives and detachment from general rules. Most of all, his use of addictive, short motifs and repeating them ad infinitum is mainly what makes him stand out. You can easily tell it's Beethoven by themes and modulations alone.
>>131234541I do think that they would have made for easier listening if a couple dances in each partita used a different key; the harmony starts to get a bit monotonous after a while.
>>131231293>no mention of the clarinet quintetkys
>>131231680>Taneyev >Taneyev's second string quintethttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI0bzsu43AA>Bruckner>Wine
>favorite composer lately?Boccherini>favorite piece(s)?String Quintet in D major, Op. 25, No. 5, G. 299.>which composer is the biggest meme?Cage?>tea or coffee?Coffee, obviously. Black.
>>131234786I've read that Taneyev is a great craftsman and all, but that he doesn't really have a recognizable style and is just a mishmash of various influences like Brahms. What are your thoughts on this?
>>131234823NTA, but to that I'd say, not everyone has to be a top-tier composer.
>>131234549>Composers before Beethoven writing for keyboards had nearly 0 expression????
>favorite composer lately?Mendelssohn>favorite piece(s)?Symphony No. 3 in A minor, Op. 56, MWV N 18, called "the Scottish">which composer is the biggest meme?Pärt!>tea or coffee?Tea, obviously. Green.
>>131234855Ah yes, the famous harpsichord dynamic range, crescendos and decrescendos, agogic accents, sustain and sostenuto pedals.What do you even think I meant by expression you dimwit?
>>131231153Glazunov has so many interesting ideas and brilliant orchestration but his form is just so weird.
>>131234991The clavichord is more expressive than piano
>>131236054Ah yes, the barely audible vibrato makes up for everything pianos have to offer. You got it, pal.
>>131234991When do you think pianos were invented, retard? Not to mention the expressive subtlety required by a melody by Mozart, which is just as evident on a keyboard as in a symphony.
>>131234549>And his handling of forms went from formalistic, Haydnesque simplicityHaydn -- like Mozart and Beethoven -- were writing from a shared, natural idiom, that was highly flexible."formalism" wasn't a thing until the 19th century with composers like Chopin and Scriabin that took formal schemata (sonata "form") as a starting point for the succession of melodic ideas.
>>131236249First fortepianos were around since Bach. That doesn't change anything whatsoever.>>131236290>Haydn -- like Mozart and Beethoven -- were writing from a shared, natural idiom, that was highly flexible.So were 19th century composers, including Chopin ane Scriabin.>"formalism" wasn't a thing until the 19th centuryIt was a thing ever since the renaissance period.>Chopin and Scriabin that took formal schemata (sonata "form") as a starting point for the succession of melodic ideas.Chopin and Scriabin did precisely what Haydn did, yes.
>>131236410>So were 19th century composers, including Chopin ane Scriabin.Not so. In Scriabin, sonata form is a succession of melodic ideas and it is divorced from the harmonic dimension of the music -- it's a fetishized crutch for Scriabin's static/post-tonal harmony to make it digestible.>It was a thing ever since the renaissance period.Except Haydn is not renaissance music. I'm speaking specifically on the common practice period.Go read some contemporary treatises like Mattheson or Koch -- sound was a major concern and "formalism" wasn't a thing. Music was conceived in rhetorical terms and formal schemata like sonata "form" was not in musical consciousness.
What was the worst expierence you've evee had at a classical concert?
>>131236613Nta but this is just bullshit; Scriabin didn't use sonata form as a meaningless crutch. He transformed sonata form to match his unique, mystical harmony. His later post-tonal style relies on a central harmonic cell, but the dramatic tension of sonata form remains tied to it.
>>131236613>In Scriabin, sonata form is a succession of melodic ideasIncorrect. Scriabin relies heavily on short motifs to construct the phrases especially in the late period where his "sonata form" begins to disintegrate and is only a "sonata" in the same sense thar Scarlatti sonatas are "sonatas". You don't understand shit about Scriabin.Motifs themselves are melodic ideas, and succession of thereof is what makes up the entirety of Haydn's music. Long, bel canto melodies are primarily Chopin's, which itself traces back to classical period sonatas.>Except Haydn is not renaissance musicNo shit. This is absolutely irrelevant. I get that you're a 60 IQ baboon but I guess stupidity has no limits.>"formalism" wasn't a thing. This imbecile thinks forms weren't analyzed and studied during the classical period. Point and laugh.>Music was conceived in rhetorical terms and formal schemata like sonata "form" was not in musical consciousness.That applies to Chopin and Scriabin just as well. No one used sonata form more consciously than anyone else. Fuck off and stop wasting my time you gigantic retard.
>haydn didn't think about "fOrM", classical period composers didn't simply come up with music, it was sent from above by the God
>>131236631"worst" experience for me wasn't that bad thankfully. When I first got into classical, I saw my local conservatory perform Beethoven's 9th. They used to do free concerts and seats weren't reserved. I had only ever been to rock concerts before and I had no context for where to sit, so I figured "hey, i'll sit as close to the stage as possible to get the most upfront sound"I sat stage right and heard nothing but violins the whole performance. >>131236750In the case of Scriabin's sonatas, they are the epitome of dry formalism>>131236757lol
>>131236828>dry formalismThey're the exact opposite of that. It's painfully obvious you don't know what that term even means.
>>131236828>the epitome of dry formalismSo just like Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven?>lolI accept your concession.
>tripfag desperately tries to discuss music in depth, in full display
Ah, are we back to "dry formalism" being the buzzword of the week again?
Scriabin aside, I don't think it's super controversial to say that ideas like sonata form didn't really exist as a reference or template during Haydn and Mozart's day. Charles Rosen dates the emergence of classical forms as a static reference to around Schubert. The definition of sonata form as a template for composition comes from post hoc musicological analysis after Beethoven. So it's not wrong to say that the relationship to musical form was different for Haydn compared to, say, Brahms. Calling Haydn a dry formalist... Well, insofar as it implies that he follows an academic scheme to compose, that would be wrong. The classical forms were an evolving, living phenomenon, not a reference. Equally, he is a composer particularly concerned with projecting long-form structured musical drama, so in that sense he is a formalist. But the word formalist here cannot mean the same thing as it would in describing late 19th century composers.
Are there any examples of wet formalism?
>>131236966That's nice and all, but you still don't know what "dry formalism" means.
>>131237041I'm not that poster. I don't have a strong opinion on Scriabin.
What is the classical equivalent of Milkshake? Asking unironically, I'm in the mood for something rhythmic and exciting. Think Shostakovich scherzos
>>131237031Scriabin
>>131236966>ideas like sonata form didn't really exist as a reference or template during Haydn and Mozart's day.They literally did. Once Haydn did it, so did the rest of the classical period composers. It didn't just pop into everyone's head suddenly on its own. It took composers studying and analyzing to figure out what was going on in Haydn's sonata forms to make one of their own, othewise we would've seen sonata forms appear way before Haydn (we only got glimpses of it from JS and CPE Bachs). What kind of nonsense are you talking about? There's nothing in your post that makes any sense whatsoever.>static reference to around Schubert.Again, absolute nonsense, if it were "static" as you say, then it would constantly sound the same every time or would apply to every single composer who composed sonatas, losing sense of the word "static" in the process.>The definition of sonata form as a template for composition comes from post hoc musicological analysis after BeethovenThis is verifiably false, so why are you saying this? Are you not at all familiar with music or just ragebaiting at this point?>The classical forms were an evolving, living phenomenonThey were, and still are. Not sure what you are getting at.
>>131237054>I'm not that posterOh, okay. Anyway, you're quite historically accurate in your assessment, but you're still potentially assuming that later composers "followed an academic scheme to compose" in the first place. I don't think that's the case with the vast majority of the great/mainstream composers. Dryness implies that those structures were the only or main impulse to compose, which I don't think is accurate at all in most cases. Maybe with someone like Reger? Although I'm only guessing. Regardless, it'd be hard to prove.
>>131237082Take it up with Rosen, I guess. What I'm saying is so uncontroversial that even he qualifies it as a cliché.>Sonata form could not be defined until it was dead. Czerny claimed with pride around 1840 that he was the first to describe it, but by then it was already part of history. The original meaning of 'sonata' was 'played' as opposed to 'sung,' and it only gradually acquired a more specific, but always flexible, sense. The definitions generally given are far too limited even for the latter part of the eighteenth century, and apply only to the romantic sonata.>The destruction of the nineteenth-century account of 'sonata form' is a game too easy and too often played. [...] Although the nineteenth-century description of sonata form is grandly deceptive, it is important to try and understand how and why such a formulation became possible. Inevitably the first generation of Romantics, which thought of structure essentially in melodic terms, tried to arrive at a thematic scheme for the sonata. What is interesting is their apparent success. 'Sonata form' as conceived after 1840 may not work for a great many classical sonatas, but it fits an even larger number. It does so in spite of elevating the purely melodic aspect of music to a position it never held in the eighteenth century, and it satisfies only in so far as there is no tension between this aspect and other determinants of the form. When it fits, it is as misleading, perhaps even more so, than when it does not, but it cannot be easily dismissed.>>131237101I don't think that myself, necessarily. I love Brahms, who is the most often stuck with this accusation of dryness, academicism, artificiality. But it is true that Brahms made reference to historical form in a way that doesn't seem to connect with all listeners. It would be dishonest not to acknowledge that the Romantic relationship with form was self-conscious and historical in a way it had not been previously.
sonata form just werks ok
>>131237082you will not be able to find haydn, mozart or beethoven ever mentioning "sonata form"
>>131236857>I accept your concession.not a concession, you're wholly ignorant to how music was conceived in the 18th century so your post is irrelevant, thus the "lol"go read some Mattheson and Koch, then get back to me>>131236966>>131237165this anon is correct
>>131237165>I don't think that myself, necessarily. I love Brahms, who is the most often stuck with this accusation of dryness, academicism, artificiality. But it is true that Brahms made reference to historical form in a way that doesn't seem to connect with all listeners. It would be dishonest not to acknowledge that the Romantic relationship with form was self-conscious and historical in a way it had not been previously.The impulses to create music were about the same, though. But yeah, "their relationship with form was different" is about as far as you can go.
>>131237165Nice appeal to authority.>Sonata form could not be defined until it was dead.Except it literally was, that's how it came to be. If it was not defined, then it would not exist at all in the first place. If Haydn did not come up with sonata form (literally "defining" the idea in musical language), then Mozart and Beethoven would not be able to study from his forms, which they did. If you mean literal definition in German, then yeah, it probably took someone to translate it for plebs. Musically, however, it was clearly defined and understood as early as the Haydn period. I don't care what Rosen says unless it's backed up by reasoning, which it isn't.>Czerny claimed with pride around 1840 that he was the first to describe it, Again, not sure how accurate this even is, but it's completely irrelevant. It was already defined by composers, to composers and musicians, musicologists and alike. Also Schubert was already dead by 1840, which contradicts the previous point.This is a lame attempt by Rosen to say something profound without any proof or evidence backing it up.>>131237185They did, right at the beginning of their piano sonata compositions, but it is totally irrelevant. Even if they didn't, they literally shared the same idea. Ideas can exist without rigid definitions in dictionaries.>>131237275>you're wholly ignorant to how music was conceived in the 18th century>NO ULiterally mindbroken at this point. I accept your concession, boy.>go read some Mattheson and KochThanks for letting us know that you both can't form an original thought of your own and have to commit obvious logical fallacies to save your skin.
>>131237498>They did, right at the beginning of their piano sonata compositionsplease explain
>>131237550I believe it says "sonata" right there. If you meant "sonata form" specifically, then it was just described in composer's own terms, not as such. This is so beyond irrelevant that it's ridiculous. Composers didn't read some letter by Czerny defining "sonata form" and decided to compose differently than they would have.
>>131237603>If you meant "sonata form" specificallythat's what i wrote, didn't i? haydn, mozart or beethoven never used that specific term in describing any of their music.
>>131237603lmfao this anon is retardedTheir use of “sonata” did not mean “sonata form”, it meant the piece was to be played and not sung (i.e. a cantata)
>>131237453I think it is sometimes unjustly used to dismiss Romantic music as bourgeois academic mannerism etc., yes. I suspect that it comes from the recognition that we're in the same position as Brahms and co. here, that modern life entails this historical self-consciousness. People want to escape it and hate to be reminded of it.>>131237498You're the only person here not grounding your claims in historical reasoning while dismissing straightforward claims with handwaving dismissals. If you are so unsure of the accuracy of that attribution to Czerny, you should read the books, whose arguments I am necessarily abbreviating. The Schubert claim is from a separate section (not sure if it's in Classical Style or Romantic Generation) and based on musical analysis of Schubert's form compared to late Beethoven, not broader historical reasoning. It's not in contradiction because he's saying that this was the moment when the music shows persistent evidence of structure from which Schubert is working toward new, Romantic ends (the structure for thematic ideas thing), not the moment when musicology starts talking about sonata form. Before the Beethovenian turning point, the definition is clearly retrospective and doesn't slot neatly onto eighteenth century compositional practices. >>131237603cmon man
>>131237652>Their use of “sonata” did not mean “sonata form”Nowhere it was said that it did. But this comment was not surprising from a room temp IQ baboon.>>131237654>You're the only person here not grounding your claims in historical reasoning while dismissing straightforward claims with handwaving dismissals.I point out logical inaccuracies and absurdities. You're saying absolutely nothing here.>It's not in contradictionHmm, let's see:>Sonata form could not be defined until it was dead. Czerny claimed with pride around 1840 that he was the first to describe itSo Czerny defined sonata form and approach to sonata form "changed" due to this, accroding to geniuses in this thread, but no>Charles Rosen dates the emergence of classical forms as a static reference to around Schubert. The definition of sonata form as a template for composition comes from post hoc musicological analysis after BeethovenSo it was around Schubert that the form became "static". So the fact that there was no definition is irrelevant and should never have been brought up, right? Nevermind, it's not like we should make sense of what we're saying, god forbid. LOL.>the definition is clearly retrospective and doesn't slot neatly onto eighteenth century compositional practices.That's true for any period, not just 18th century.
>>131237773Academic commentary lagging behind the real-time development contradicts nothing, especially for a discipline that was very different before Beethoven changed music (musicology arguably didn't really exist beforehand). The statement you've partially quoted says not that Czerny caused this change but that the continuous development of the classical forms had ended by the time he gave a definition, that it was "already part of history", which accords perfectly with the idea that this change happened organically around the time of Schubert. It is a descriptive claim and does not suggest that Czerny caused it. I don't think you read the quoted text very closely.
>>131237862You literally said the following:>The definition of sonata form as a template for composition comes from post hoc musicological analysis after Beethoven. So it's not wrong to say that the relationship to musical form was different for Haydn compared to, say, Brahms.Where you made a logical leap:>So it's not wrong to say.... Having definition of sonata "after Beethoven" (so by 1840, AFTER Schubert had died) does not imply that relationship to musical form was or became different. And I'm saying this for the 10th time, a rigid definition was not required for classical period composers to define abstract ideas. In other words, the idea of sonata form existed ever since Haydn and kept evolving through the 19th century. Every single composer had their own individual approach, some were more radical than others. There was no sudden "shift" in compositional approach, Beethoven merely sped up the process of its evolution. I can agree with that much, but what you're suggesting is incoherent.
>>131237975>the idea of sonata form existed ever since Haydn[citation needed]
>>131237975Because it's true, certainly for Brahms or indeed Scriabin. With late Beethoven and Schubert there is ambiguity as to the extent to which sonata form had taken on the Romantic understanding, which is why it's fruitful to parse out the details like Rosen does, but there's no such question about late nineteenth century composers. If you wanted to argue that earlier transitional composers like these might have been more or less Romantic in this way, I wouldn't object. It's a complex change that happens over several decades with Beethoven as the fulcrum. But it's just plain wrong to claim that the idea of sonata form existed with Haydn.
I might be retarded but Mozart's form is pretty consistent through his works. Exposition > repeat > development > recapEven if he didn't call it "sonata form", it absolutely was
>>131238135>it absolutely wasnot for mozart
>>131238001In fact it existed even before, in rather primitive shapes, the Prussian sonatas for example. CPE Bach kept revising his own earlier binary-form pieces to push them closer to what we'd now call sonata form, introducing clearer thematic sentence-structure, a differentiated theme in the dominant, and distinct development and recapitulation sections. Haydn started treating the development section differently: fragmenting, recombining, modulating etc., rather than as a free fantasia-like structures by CPE. These are two genuinely different compositional approaches that happened to be working with similar underlying binary-form template. The very same ideas started appearing everywhere, including early Mozart and then K. 387-465, directly influenced by Haydn and his own abstract "definition" of the first-movement form.>>131238083>the extent to which sonata form had taken on the Romantic understandingThere is no "romantic understanding". Every single one of the "great" composers you've ever heard of, studied the same score as Beethoven did, in addition to the newer approaches pioneered by the romantics, if that's what you mean then sure. Every single decade was different from the last, I didn't think something that obvious needed to be pointed out.>But it's just plain wrong to claim that the idea of sonata form existed with Haydn.Sigh. Read the comment above.>>131238135No shit.
>>131238135Mozart's handling of sonata "form" is a lot less formal than that of the 19th century composers. There were just as many exceptions in his music including the K.499 finale. For further reading:Hepokoski/Darcy - Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types and Deformations in the Late 18th Century Sonata
>>131238135The form you see in Brahms is much less flexible than Mozart or Haydn. The nineteenth century criteria, like, for example, the idea that sonata form entails a new theme in the dominant, simply don't fit a lot of the music.>>131238215This is not evidence of Haydn having the idea of sonata form. It is evidence that Haydn and other composers were working toward long-form abstract structures for instrumental music, but the term is retrospective and can't capture how the composers themselves understood it. The Romantics understood the forms used by the classical composers in their own way and put them to different ends, leading to a definition that placed special emphasis on the thematic structure; this is the idea of sonata form. It's a simple matter of historicity and understanding them as they understood themselves. Sonata form does suffice as a retrospective term for Haydn and Mozart, but projecting the idea of sonata form itself backwards is a misuse and leads to exactly the misunderstanding that Haydn was a rigid formalist.
>>131238409>This is not evidence of Haydn having the idea of sonata form.The fact that repeating pattern of exposition > development > recap, exists, is already a proof that the idea had existed. This is a common sense.>but the term is retrospective and can't capture how the composers themselves understood it.Every individual has their own understanding of words, this is just obvious as shit and does not need to be said.>The Romantics understood the forms used by the classical composers in their own way and put them to different endsThere is no proof whatsoever, that romantics and classical period composers "understood" the form differently from one another in any meaningful context. Romantics had more to learn from, that's the primary difference.>but projecting the idea of sonata form itself backwards is a misuse and leads to exactly the misunderstanding that Haydn was a rigid formalist.I don't give a shit about your fancy terminology, "rigid formalist" this, that, makes no difference whatsoever. The fact is that, Haydn was working within some kind of context, which was later recognized as the sonata form. You're being obtuse.
>>131238293Another repeating pattern is this tripfaggot appealing to authority without having a single thought of his own. You can't reason with this moron.
>>131238710It's not common sense at all. There is a crucial difference between an empirical phenomenon and *an idea* of the phenomenon. You are effectively making something like the claim that Homer thought "I'm going to write a poem in the epic form" before writing the Iliad. Did it arise in an epoch in which those long oral poems existed? Yes. Does the term suffice as a retrospective term? Sure. But there is a meaningful artistic difference between the artist who is working in flexible and evolving form and the artist who considers that form a solved game and consciously invokes it, like Virgil in the present comparison. You are treating sonata form like it's historically universal and not an idea that arises under specific conditions of nineteenth century music.As for proof, I gave you as much of a basic outline as is reasonable for a 4chan post as to how Romantic composers treated sonata form as predominantly a structure for thematic material and used it as a reference or scheme (although if you need proof that Brahms had stricter form than Haydn then I assume you've never heard either of them). If what you're saying were true, the War of the Romantics could not have happened because the progressive perspective rested on the idea that the classical forms were exhausted and artificially buoyed up by conservative composers. This change we're talking about in which sonata form became codified was not just real but known to and fiercely debated by the composers.
>>131238710>The fact that repeating pattern of exposition > development > recap, exists, is already a proof that the idea had existed. This is a common sense.what you're describing isn't exclusive to "sonata form" because it's rooted in a shared musical language throughout the 18th century.The chief concern on composers, including Haydn, wasn't the "form" of their music, it was providing audiences with striking and recognizable subject matter -- open to development -- to elicit emotional responses. >>131238735how dare I provide anons with reading recs, everyone should just be retarded like you I guess.
>>131237498>If it was not defined, then it would not exist at all in the first placeprofound wisdom
Scriabinhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA5cmuVQeGo&list=OLAK5uy_n-DRos36zZydaTNVxBsWaCXuTAfGIaGVo&index=130After listening to the first half of this set with the piano sonatas, Preludes, and Etudes a few times, I've finally made it to the second half with the Mazurkas, Poemes, Impromptus, and assorted pieces.
>>131234753Why would I mention the quintet on a post about the violin concerto, anon? I'm planning on sharing all his major works. Be patient, and be kind.
>>131239253Ditch that shitfest of a set already for fuck's sake
>>131238888>You are effectively making something like the claim that Homer thought "I'm going to write a poem in the epic form" before writing the Iliad.Homer thought exactly that, but in different terminology. "Epic form" was not defined back then, but he didn't come up with the form that hw was writing in himself, he was working within the context of that form which he perfectly knew.>and the artist who considers that form a solved game and consciously invokes itExcept we don't know if anyone at all considered the form "solved". It was evolving as it was ever since its beginning.>Romantic composers treated sonata form as predominantly a structure for thematic material and used it as a reference or schemeExcept that's *literally* what the classical period composers did as well. Mozart didn't just coincidentally compose a sonata form for K. 387, he was influenced by Haydn and even admitted so in letters to Haydn's father. This idea that romantics had different approach because it was "defined" academically in 1840's is absurd.>although if you need proof that Brahms had stricter form than Haydn Both were pretty strict. Chopin and Scriabin were much less strict, they almost returned back to CPE in some sense by adding improvisatory elements to the form. Which is the opposite to bullshit you or someone else here claimed initially.>the progressive perspective rested on the idea that the classical forms were exhausted and artificially buoyed up by conservative composersWhich was - according to Wagner himself - mistake stemming from ignorance. Not only did Wagner have much respect for Brahms but he himself composed a symphony and was sketching another at the very end of his life and there's MORE: all later composers were still using sonata form and barely anyone was composing Wagnerian operas. All Wagner managed to do was popularize Liszt's harmony and thematic transformations, and write some good music with it, that's about it.The "progressive" idea was a lie.
>>131239295I have to finish it first before I can revisit Alexeev's and do a comparison of the two. Not to mention all the sets of just the piano sonatas or Preludes or Etudes. But yeah, only once I've heard the whole thing, preferably twice, will I be free again.
>>131238942>what you're describing isn't exclusive to "sonata form" because it's rooted in a shared musical language throughout the 18th century.It's exclusive to sonata form. You can try and name a single piece of this architecture which isn't a "sonata" but you won't.>The chief concern on composers, including Haydn, wasn't the "form" of their musicI don't give a shit what their concern was. We were discussing their form, which is referred to as sonata-allegro. >recsMore like fallacies instead of original thought. Not a shred of intelligence in your posts, literal smoothbrain kek
I feel like I've seen this album cover before...
>>131239398Looks like close to the edge
>>131239398It's a common format. For another label, however. Plagiarists! One example<--------
There are only 2 forms present in Moxart's music: "Fantastic" and "Beautiful"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvfcQzX1tSI
>>131239416That's it...
who the hell is Moxart
>>131239301Haydn did not compose in strict sonata form by nineteenth century standards. I'll just quote Rosen again since this point is pedantic:>The description's insufficiency is manifest when we consider that Haydn often used only one theme for his sonatas and, in particular, generally marked the modulation to the dominant by repeating the opening measures in their new place even when he used several themes; that Mozart preferred to mark the change to the dominant by an entirely new theme (although he followed Haydn's practice on occasion); and that Beethoven often favored a compromise in which the new theme marking the change is clearly a variant of the opening theme of the work. The presence of a new theme at this point, far from being indispensable as is often thought, is not even remotely a decisive element of the form.Besides that, you are just repeating your claim that awareness of contemporary formal language is equivalent to understanding it in retrospective terms as a set of defined conventions, which is just bad conceptual history. Handwaving over a century of composers trying in various ways to craft new bottles for Liszt's new wine on the basis of Wagner's juvenile symphony is also very misleading. Composing in Wagnerian style doesn't mean copying Wagnerian opera but trying to build sui generis formal language for new expressive ends. It's self-evident how this was a legitimate compositional goal for dozens of composers well into the twentieth century. I don't really care if you think they were lying to themselves or the world because the point is that the change existed, not that it necessitated their response.>Homer thought exactly that, but in different terminology. cmon man
Every time I listen to a set of Beethoven's symphonies, I am tempted to skip the 6th.
>>131239490sad
>>131239490what's stopping you?
>>131239504It really is sad that Beethoven marred his his symphonic oeuvre with that failed experiment.
>>131239515The thought that maybe this performance will be the one where I'll finally "get" it.
>>131239517You can ignore the programmatic content. It just sounds good.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD3-JVV5vss&list=OLAK5uy_m_HLdMRLmv9KAkzqvLHjhw2vc_ch99vpU&index=1Hell. Yes.
>>131239253Hopefully when you finish you move on to much better recordings.
every time i listen to a set of beethoven symphonies, i skip nos. 1, 2, the last two movements of no. 3, no. 8 and the last movement of no. 9
If Beethoven was a bear he’d be called Bearhoven
>>131239541see: >>131239315On the whole I like it, but it certainly isn't perfect, and I can see why many here wouldn't like it, as it does lack the characteristic masculinity of Scriabin. It's feminized, neutralized, beautified.
>>131239569Yeah, the word you're looking for is "neutered".
>>131239664Give me a break, my daily medicine hasn't fully kicked in yet.
Scriabin - The Complete Works
Scriabin - The Incomplete Works
How do you count this??Time is 3/4
>>131240063one and two and three and
>>131240381which note do I play right at the two count
>>131240535you are holding that A sharp still>oneB>and twoA sharp>AndC>ThreeB sharp>And-G
>>131240605sank you.one more question, it says B sharp on the 3rd count, which is the same as C natural. But since the key is in A Major, do I play C sharp instead?
Is Pittsburgh under Manfred Honeck, with Alexandre Kantorow as soloist, worth dropping 65 euros on a ticket? I'm not used to paying that much for concerts, normally I pay <20.
>>131240743no, you play the C natural. The melody goes B - A# - C# - C - G#
Holy shit, Vivaldi is actually great.
René Leibowitz's Beethoven—bold and exciting!
René Leibowitz's Sibelius—bold and exciting!
hey give me back my (You)
René Leibowitz—bald and excreting!
How did I do with this orchestration of a Linked Horizon track?https://voca.ro/18eJdeZLd3kQ
>>131240947Sorry, I realized it's funnier that way.
>>131240909The only point to his detriment is that his soloists in the 9th kinda suck.
>>131241172The 9th* kinda sucks.>*last movement
>>131240901Which piece made you say that? Was it Gloria? The 4 seasons?
>>131241253L'estro armonico, the chamber concertos, and the oboe concertos.
>>131241486Fav recordings, if you'd be so kind?
>>131240909Yeah it's a great cycle.>>131241172That and the somewhat dry acoustics, though they do provide some nice orchestral clarity.
>only listened to Scriabin for the last 2 weeks Ok I'm done with him
>>131241871That's what you think.
What performance of Tristan und Isolde should I watch? I’ve never seen it before
>>131234471In that recording, it's just boring. >>131240773Honestly I would go just for the Schulhoff arrangement. It's a wonderful piece, but paying that much money for 20 minutes is maybe not worth it. Not too crazy on the Rach or Shosty.
After listening to hundreds of WTC this is pretty refreshing
>>131239529I don't think you'll ever get it, anon, I'm sorry
>>131239569It's also, and I cannot stress this enough, poorly played. Like, it's bad. Bad playing: Wrong notes, wrong phrasing, slurred chords, rushing, draggin; BAD PLAYING. It's amazing they ever greenlit that trainwreck.
>>131242976That's a bit excessive, anon. There's a reason they call it interpretation.
>>131243159>excessiveNot at all. I still remember when that one anon brought up the actual score and compared it to snippets from that set. It was atrocious. Utterly criminal that they charge money for that set.
>>131243194>comparing it to the sheet musicYeah, I don't care about any of that. I just care about how it sounds to my ears, brain, and heart.
>>131243231Sounds like it doesn't matter if it's Scriabin they're playing then. Why listen to it? Why not listen to some random no-name chinese child prodigy producing piles of generic romantic-esque piano music?
>>131243262Again, quite the leap. Some liberties isn't the same as the notes and written music don't matter at all lol.
>>131243280Playing bad is not "some liberties">written music don't matterAlright, you don't have to be able to read music to enjoy it, but this statement is ridiculous. The kind of shit I'd expect someone who thinks reading an AI summary of a book is qualitatively equivalent to actually reading the book to say. You have to be better than this.
Have you learned to appreciate Britten's War Requiem yet?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ro75cWEIhY
>>131243305>but this statement is ridiculous.I said 'some liberties' isn't the same as acting like the 'written music [doesn't] matter at all'
>>131243321Alright, fair. The punctuation made that sentence a bit confusing. Regardless, the first part of my reply stands: Playing the wrong notes and playing them the wrong way goes beyond "some liberties".
feels like a Der Rosenkavalier evening (in mono!)(godly) orchestral openinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvXW3d5nKyg&list=OLAK5uy_m0S8GswZ10_j_nKtmMYNkmWqbyDoH7moc&index=1vocalshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnCHwZdvcRc&list=OLAK5uy_m0S8GswZ10_j_nKtmMYNkmWqbyDoH7moc&index=2It seems both Erich and Carlos Kleiber made acclaimed recordings of this work. We'll do Erich this time and save Carlos for next.
>Johann Baptist Joseph Maximilian Regerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sgbXCKO0f0https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8ABgdSPuhEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMX0-Lm109shttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP41J0147YQ>Reger’s Piano Trio in E minor is sometimes described as his ‘Second Piano Trio’ but is in fact the first he composed for the usual three instruments. The first movement is a large-scale extended sonata structure on a seminal E–F–D sharp–E motif that in the manner of Brahms binds not only the movement but the entire work. A spectral pizzicato scherzo in C minor follows, then a Largo sonata–rondo with a beautiful hymn-like theme. The Brahmsian finale includes examples of Reger’s beloved fugal writing, march-rhythms and a chorale-like theme. A propensity for full textures, exemplified in much of this trio, suggests the influence of the organ loft, where Reger was perhaps most at home.>“Max Reger’s only piano trio, Op 102, was composed in 1908. It is one of his best works. It is quite clear and tonally beautiful. It is not just straight forward on paper, it plays that way as well. His use of harmony is uncommonly witty. The moods of the huge first movement, Allegro moderato, are alternately acerbic and passionate. There is something undoubtedly elemental to this music and here Reger’s tremendous counterpoint skills are on display. The tonalities of the second movement, Allegretto, are quite original and leave a ghostly impression, while the middle section features a lovely, canonic duet between the strings. The magnificent Largo which follows is in the Lydian mode and is rich in ideas. The work concludes with a finale, Allegro con moto, brimming with appealing melody. I warmly recommend this trio, not only to professionals but also to amateurs who will be richly repaid by the time they take to acquaint themselves with this music.” -The famous chamber music critic Wilhelm Altmann writing in his Handbook for Piano Trio Players
>>131243399I do love me some piano trios. I been saving this one in the backlog until the perfect mood struck.
>>131243412As Neil Young used to sing: Tonight's the night
>>131242860>listening to hundreds of WTCseek help, before it's too late.
>>131243925
I randomly remembered a fugue, probably by Bach but I can't find it, it sounds kind of like this:https://vocaroo.com/13NMZWskgS7wDoes anyone recognize it?
>>131244168petzold - minuet
I actually liked this a lot. It's a softer, more tender side of Bruckner. Humanist rather than transcendent. Feminine rather than masculine. Basically the complete opposite of Bohm and Jochum. Like Karajan but on sedatives.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhzK3slh39M&list=OLAK5uy_lYipPorouKDe9gZ3tCvWYZp6PRAOHKXIc&index=1It won't replace any of one's favorites but again, I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. Very comfy.
now playingstart of Schumann: Fantasy Op. 17 in C Majorhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsmS2C40b50&list=OLAK5uy_mUROD_ZLbIGNgmpY3cMp2zz7_c6SoyQi4&index=2start of Liszt: Études d'exécution transcendante, S. 139 (selected)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5E9-RxvYixw&list=OLAK5uy_mUROD_ZLbIGNgmpY3cMp2zz7_c6SoyQi4&index=4https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mUROD_ZLbIGNgmpY3cMp2zz7_c6SoyQi4>These works present severe challenges even to the most accomplished virtuosi, and Kissin comes through with flying colors. He responds to the Schumann, which requires both tenderness and passion, with exquisite sensitivity and power. If Kissin doesn't quite match the excellent versions by Richter, Arrau, and Horowitz, he does convey the ardent passion and volatility of the score. Kissin's Liszt is on a similar level; what it occasionally may lack in moments of tranquility is more than made up for with spontaneity and daring--few pianists before the public today take so many risks and emerge unscathed. Above all, this disc illustrates Kissin's pianistic mastery, his affinity for drama and color, and his sheer delight of engagement with the instrument. An immensely enjoyable disc. --Dan DavisI've explored the discography of many composers and conductors. Something fun to do is it might be time to do the same with some famous and favorite musicians. Go through (most) everything the likes of Kissin, Richter, Gilels, Horowitz, Uchida, Brendel, Arrau, etc. for pianists, and the equivalent of violinists and cellists recorded. Fun way to explore and try out new, unfamiliar recordings.
i'm the meistersingeryes this figure is meant to be Wagnerhttps://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/jul/27/die-meistersinger-von-nurnberg-bayreuth-wagner-antisemitism
>>131244663Regietheater: not even once!
>>131241611Well, so far I've listened to Accademia Bizantina and I Musici/Heinz Holliger. Basically, anything with Holliger is gold.
>>131244663>>131246170When will Regietheater die already? It's so boring.
>>131231153i've been collecting 'amens' from renaissance choral music here's one from johannes ockeghem a central figure of the burgundian or franco-flemish school:https://vocaroo.com/186SB4dIkdPJand here's one from josquin des prez a direct disciple and student of ockeghem:https://vocaroo.com/1n4lE0ttzej4and this one by nicolas gombert who was a disciple of josquin:https://vocaroo.com/14Mb2hnR1hXpand here's one by william byrd from england:https://vocaroo.com/1ofwKOSnB0gw
>>131246258It won't die anytime soon, and if anything will only accelerate as a "necessary" response to growing right-wing political populism across the Western world
>>131247009Based. I suppprt anything that owns the chuds.
>>131239529i got you senpaihttps://youtu.be/bOiWjtM4qI8?si=OLXWxUtdMNdKz2kNOfficial Beethoven Symphony rankings:693578421
>>131243399Pretty good.
Beethoven symphonies, arranged numerically987654321
>>131236631Singer was crushed by a set piece five minutes into the opera. Poor guy died on stage.
>>131247405So Regietheater has a bodycount... guess I shouldn't be surprised desu.
>>131247414I'm sure people had died in traditional opera settings as well.
>>131247414>>131247432It was Tcherniakov's staging, and he is all about regieoper, yes. The guy has some amazing bangers though - his Tsar's Bride with Staatsoper Berlin and Barenboim conducting is the best Tsar's Bride staging I've ever heard. He reimagined it as a movie casting set in the GDR, which vibes surprisingly well with the original text.If anyone wants to hear it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAM3W2j8fI0https://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4557263Anyway, back to the topic. It was Rimsky-Korsakov's Sadko reimagined as an underwater amusement park.Funny story, actually. I bought tickets to this Sadko staging three times. First, I bought a ticket for an April 2020 performance, which was of course canceled because of COVID. Got refunded. Bought tickets the second time when they reopened; however, they sold 50% of the seats only - COVID limitations hit again. But after some time, the government changed its tune and allowed public events only if 25% of seats were sold, for social distancing (great times actually, got to see several stagings with almost empty hall, and there was no talking since people were forced to sit far apart). So everyone was refunded, and they restarted sales, which I missed. Finally, I bought tickets to Sadko for the third time, went, and, yes, five minutes into the prologue, a set piece descends from the ceiling and crushes the singer's head. The guy was dead pretty much immediately, although they called an ambulance and all that. And Sadko's staging was retired after that, so I never got to see it.
>>131247288>tripfag beethovenfaggot>mediocre rankingI'm surprised it's not shit, but here is *objectively* correct, indisputable ranking, from best to worst:836759412Number by number, this is the only true ranking.
>>131247405shiiii
>Chopin's piano concertos. Requiems on innocence.how's that as a smart thing to say
>>131248050That's pretty weird. I don't listen to Requiems but as far as I remember they aren't nearly as melodic as Chopin's piano concertos which are basically Italian operas in classical concerto form
>Frédéric fucking Chopin. The absolute GOAT of music, art and human achievement. The God himself. >Also the only important pre-20th composer (except only Paganini and arguably Schumann) with 0 sacred musicCoincidence?I think not.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijiy9e_J6S4
>>131248394Trvke but only the >GOAT of (piano) music
>>131248394That's like the music they use in horror films to create that eerie, old-timey atmosphere.
>>131248394Does Parsifal and Liebesmahl der Apostel count as sacred music?
reminder: Schumann actually has a mass and requiemhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm-2NAX7jCohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPeGL4zL0N0
>>131248475No Pages for Competent Orchestration
>>131248475Yeah but they were not written for the church and that's what makes them stand out. Still counts as sacred music I guess.
>>131248475Yes but no one cares about him
Rachmaninoffhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ8TXrBoNFg&list=OLAK5uy_mEfv1zMgMGXvJJA0_mQNfSWId0sFXylHQ&index=1
now playingVaughan Williams: Norfolk Rhapsody No. 2https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX6fD4VC6n8&list=OLAK5uy_mvzMYAgU6TGYt-fcOwRjhJoZGNq-7QNHs&index=2start of Vaughan Williams: Symphony No. 3, "Pastoral"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-y1jEmZY44&list=OLAK5uy_mvzMYAgU6TGYt-fcOwRjhJoZGNq-7QNHs&index=3Vaughan Williams: The Running Sethttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THuvWBA9lB8&list=OLAK5uy_mvzMYAgU6TGYt-fcOwRjhJoZGNq-7QNHs&index=7Vaughan Williams: Norfolk Rhapsody No. 1https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7I-hT5dlss&list=OLAK5uy_mvzMYAgU6TGYt-fcOwRjhJoZGNq-7QNHs&index=7https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mvzMYAgU6TGYt-fcOwRjhJoZGNq-7QNHs
>tfw no Prokofiev piano triowhy live?
>>131248423Not even that.
>Italians have the best musical identity and ideas>they waste that potential and make stupid opera shit insteadWell, at least they have those 3 or 4 amazing instrumental music composers.
>>131249060Yeah, he's the GOAT of all music, period.
Alright, enough with the gay romantic stuff, time for some real music.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIqlJbTdF8g&list=OLAK5uy_lk4Sso2Og3noqdv04FRlqpafz5JoswxOU&index=13
>>131249150Not even the GOAT of piano, much less comparable to any of the composers who could write for more than one instrument.
>He was a political radical all his life and a passionate enthusiast for such diverse things as medieval music, The Jungle Book of Rudyard Kipling, Johann Sebastian Bach, film stars (especially Lilian Harvey and Ginger Rogers), traveling, stereoscopic photography and socialism.based?
>>131249338>Not the GOAT of pianoCorrect, GOAT of all music.
>>131249407Why are you stupid on purpose?
>>131249397What are we thinking here—autism or ADHD?
>>131249429No, just stating the facts, newfish.
>>131249491newfish
>>131247732Long ago I also thought 8th was Beethoven’s best, but then I stopped being a contrarian
Ultimate redpill ranking of Beethoven's symphonies:759832461
>>131249442probably adhd, his style range is so wide that he couldn't be autistic
>>131249713Simultaneously disrespectful AND based
>Mahler spoke about Bruckner with the brutal frankness characteristic of him when he was with close friends: by shortening the first movement, he had sought 'merely to eliminate what is empty and irrelevant'. The Fifth Symphony as a whole caused him more pain than pleasure. Many splendid passages and themes of Beethovenian grandeur, were not carried through, developed, and integrated into the whole. The general effect was that of 'a mishmash' devoid of any logical structure, 'a sort of fabric that someone has woven with old bits of thread chosen at random and coarsely knotted, without bothering about whether or not they blend in and without noticing that they destroy the unity and beauty of the ensembles'. While he liked the Scherzo, and above all the Trio, 'with its marvellous original, "typically Viennese" melody', he added:>«You'll see! There's nothing to be done for Bruckner without a scalpel. As he is at present he will never really take his place in the repertoire. I've done my best to make him live. Possibly the three symphonies I've done here with the Philharmonic will be the ones most often performed, but with all the cuts I've made.»
>>131249060Then who is? Serious question
>>131250637Love him or hate him, he was right on this one.
>The Barcarolles are Fauré's hymn to the Venetian gondoliers, and his most feeble works. It was largely composed due to his lack of testosterone after an exhausting and troubling period that pitched him into deafness. Franz Liszt visited him at that time and as Fauré met him off the gondolier, Liszt looked up at the spectacular tapeworm pill collection, ozempic of its day, it was reserved for the the delicate, skinny French nobility, only to be told: "No use looking up there, that’s all been composed by me."
>The Ninth Symphony is Beethoven’s hymn to the natural evacuation and his longest work. It was largely composed in 1822 after an exhausting and troubling period that pitched him into feverish creative activity. Carl Czerny visited him at that time and as Beethoven met him off the piano Czerny looked down at the spectacular chamber pot under his piano only to be told: "No use looking up there, that’s all been composed by me."
>>131251189:D>>131251249-_-
Beethovenhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjeJT181Nog&list=OLAK5uy_kVyLq9r885VXQUbyD6dxu4dvcTphswc1w&index=1For peak spiritual health, one should listen to Beethoven's 9th at least once every two weeks.
Max Regerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8d3gCqzuHZY&list=OLAK5uy_k_q5BRcrUDPWuUiYejRFa9iwRXplIjeuo&index=1
>>131250640Scriabin, obviously.
>>131249088Yeah, it's a tragedy.
Hadn't listened to Mahler for a couple of weeks, felt like a 3 today. I desperately want to hear it live, if only for the coda of the 3rd movement and the 5th movement.
>>131251936Bimm Bamm!
>>131251661(You)
>>131251959bamm bamm
>>131251936Mahler 3 has so much interpretive range. It can be slow and cosmic, it can be fast and tender, it can be rough and natural, it can be polished and affected. So fun.
>>131250640Chopin, obviously
>>131251661>the guy that went from discount Chopin with half his talent to vertical-slopper Liszt wannabe with twice the virtuoso superficiality>actually le goatkek. good one.
>Elgar, Delius, and Holst all died in 1934Wtf? Did the French composers send down a plague on their English counterparts?
>>131252266>Bach, Handel and Scarlatti were all born in 1685So what's your theory about them
>Büttner, Godowsky and Lehár were all born 1870Kinda crazy.
>>131252332Who tf is Buttner
>>131252225Trvke
note to self: never listen to the classicls music opinions of people who say things like "GOAT" or "truke"
>>131251678the real tragedy is being filtered by opera
Wagner is the GOATTrvke btw
let's get Transcendentalhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sx_KEXzK7E&list=OLAK5uy_mYYE2SX8ubmajJIOedEY8QxcYUNQYiAmw&index=8
Was looking for a new VC to try so I searched "british violin concertos" and came upon this blogpost,>British Violin Concertos: My Personal Baker’s Dozen>Alexander Mackenzie Violin Concerto in C sharp minor, Op. 32 (1884-5 ) [Hyperion]>Charles Villiers Stanford Violin Concerto in D major, Op. 74 (1899) [Hyperion]>Edward Elgar Violin Concerto in B minor, Op. 61 (1909-10) [Many!!]>Samuel Coleridge-Taylor Violin Concerto in G minor, Op. 80 (1911) [Lyrita, Hyperion and Avie]>Haydn Wood Violin Concerto in A minor (1928) [Dutton]>Arthur Somervell Violin Concerto in G minor (1930) [Hyperion]>Guirne Creith Violin Concerto in G minor (1932-34) [Dutton]>Arnold Bax Violin Concerto (1938) [Chandos]>William Walton Violin Concerto (1938-9) [Many]>E.J. Moeran Violin Concerto (1941) [Lyrita]>Thomas Pitfield Concerto Lirico for Violin and Full Orchestra (1958) [Dutton]>David Morgan Violin Concerto (1965-6) [Lyrita]>Lionel Sainsbury Violin Concerto, Op. 14 (1989) [Dutton]https://landofllostcontent.blogspot.com/2011/06/british-violin-concertos-my-personal.htmlAbout half of these are new to me! Lots of music to explore, so figured I'd share the list here in case anyone else is interested.
>reading review for a recording of Bach's WTC on piano>"At times I found it difficult to tell whether what I was hearing was a piano or a harpsichord."dismissedand they meant that in a positive way
is it just me or does it always momentarily look like Argerich is breastfeeding on this cover?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xskZFLW0qy0&list=OLAK5uy_mbQ5rXjqEyff1CJ0Un_Gsb0XurJeDX3Gw&index=20
Schuberts sonatas are better than Beethoven
>>131251515Reger's oeuvre is the New Testament of harmony.
>>131254502bait used to be believable.
>>131254523Dogma should be defensibleRitual should be repeatableLiturgy should be legibleBelief should be beautifulWhat fulfils these conditions in the decadent modern world in which "God is Dead"? Answer: the holy poetry of Richard Wagner and his "Sacred Festival Stage Play" which transforms and supersedes religion.https://youtu.be/yF0pwSC7qWg?list=PL_Cf5Xxn5OZY1gE9zsWHAjXz6MVz9IZYS
>>131254562Wagner is dead. Wagner remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us?W.
>>131251352absolutely!
Ibykus: At one time, the Amadeus Quartet took private lessons with the great violinist Georges Enescu? Brainin: Yes. It happened during the mid-fifties. At one recital we played Mozart’s first “Haydn Quartet,” publicly for the first time, and Enescu himself turned up. Knowing he was there made us anxious.Later, Enescu came up to me and said in German: “Thank you for yesterday evening’s recital, it was very fine; but to be frank, you took the Minuet far too slowly.” I replied, “But it’s clearly marked allegretto.” Enescu said, “I know, but it’s wrong. Later, Mozart changed, and in fact improved upon it, and wrote allegro; and the effect is quite, quite different.” Then he asked whether we had plans for the afternoon. We had planned to rehearse, but I said no. He replied, “I’d very much like to show you how to play Beethoven’s quartets, but unfortunately, it will have to be on the piano.”After lunch, the five of us appeared in the recital hall. Enescu sat at the grand piano, back to the “audience,” and began to play by heart. Each tone was precise, and his expressiveness a sheer phenomenon.Ibykus: He began with Op. 18, No. 1?Brainin: Yes, then played straight through all the quartets, including the late ones, omitting repeats and occasionally passages, saying, “You know how this bit goes.” He changed the order slightly and ended with Op. 131. It lasted the entire afternoon into evening. Students quietly entered and listened. When Enescu finished and turned around, he saw the room full of people, and everyone burst into wild applause. He knew all four voices, playing and articulating them with ideal dynamic equilibrium. I believe he was an even finer pianist than violinist.Yehudi Menuhin also told me of Enescu’s phenomenal memory. In Paris in the 1920s, Ravel arrived with his new violin sonata. Enescu glanced at the manuscript, played a little, then played through the entire sonata from memory with Ravel, who still had his nose glued to the score.
Faurehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o22JADBLvy4&list=OLAK5uy_nGhxCZqGQ-r8MSPLXw2W54L3t6KUtbxuw&index=26
>>131255571That's a fantastic story. On that note, are there any recordings of Beethoven's string quartets arranged for piano? I must find out.
What is the proper name for this configuration when there's a dotted half note ringing throughout the entire measure while eight notes are playing?
>>131255813a manual pedal.
>>131251515Hell yeah, brother.>https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mofTJ9AClns&pp=ygUSc2F5YWthIHNob2ppIHJlZ2VyI love Reger's violin pieces.
I just spent 4 hours typing notes one by one from a score in PDF format into music editing software and it fucking crashed on me. Now I have to start over...
>>131256567kill yourself, retard.
>>131256567where do I unsubscribe from your blog?
>>131256567This is why I use lilypond. My text editor never crashes.
>>131254502Correct. This should not be controversial. Beethoven could never quite reach the same heights as Schubert other than the sonata no.30.
Does anyone know any good torrent trackers for filmed operas and ballets?
>>131256790>muh unprepared modulations
>>131256822>muh prepared modulations>muh autistic motifs>muh surprising harmonies
>>131256832exactly, proper composing
>>131256841Good that we agree Schubert is superior then.
>>131256815rutracker
>Franz Schubert's Piano Sonata in B-flat major (D. 960) features dozens of fluid modulations across its four massive movements. While individual sections like the finale famously contain around 14 distinct key shifts, the entire multi-movement work travels through an expansive, shifting harmonic landscape well exceeding thirty total tonal changesle modulation gimmick man
>>131252018(You) too.>>131252253Nice non-argument with buzzwords bro.
>>131253248Correct. infantile Chopinfags and their sissy salon music can therefore be easily dismissed.
>Schubert piano sonatas with repeats
>>131256989There was no argument to respond to in the first place, Shitabin sucks
>>131256909exactly, proper composing
>>131257182it must hurt to realize your favorite composer was a gimmick artist. but look at the bright side: he was a terrific songwriter!
>there are people itt who think stravinsky was a bad composer and not an absolute master of his craft https://youtu.be/awM9aUXFR1o
>>131256909by that logic the best piano sonata composers are Wuorinen and Boulez. a more appropriate criteria for judgement would be the ability to reconcile expression and atmosphere with large scale form and unity.>>131257182kill yourself.
>>131257334I don't think Beethoven was a terrific songwriter, sorry.
>>131257362>reconcile expression and atmosphere with large scale formyes, and i'm pointing out that the only thing that keeps schubert's last sonata going is endless modulation. the melody is absolutely lovely, but to simply repeat it in different keys for 15 minutes makes for a slight composition.
>>131257489>the only thing that keeps Schubert's last sonata going is endless modulation.The unmistakable signature of a second or even third-rate composer if ever I saw it.
>>131257045I accept your concession.
>>131257489>>131257512>the melody is absolutely lovely, but to simply repeat it in different keys for 15 minutes makes for a slight composition.But enough about Beethoven
>>131254248>Samuel Coleridge-Taylor Violin Concerto in G minor, Op. 80 (1911) [Lyrita, Hyperion and Avie]>Arthur Somervell Violin Concerto in G minor (1930) [Hyperion]Nice, here's an album: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy8wW8tnP1k&list=OLAK5uy_n_8rl8AoaGhWtCORH1bt3ycHO1QpJPehM&index=1>William Walton Violin Concerto (1938-9) [Many]His Cello and Viola Concertos are way better, his Viola Concerto is the best Viola Concerto ever written imo, and Cello Concerto is top tier.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVO_CevHNnMhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P23GdaDcPkU
>>131257561And I accept yours.
>>131257847>>131257561get a room.
>>131256567damn sorry anon :(>>131257011:p
now playingstart of Saint-Saëns: Sonata No. 1 in D Minor for Violin & Piano, Op. 75, R.123https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP01dHKQVAg&list=OLAK5uy_nnl8iD5HmwfcwgCt_Jmf4z2fpHGE_mDSQ&index=2start of Franck: Sonata In A Major For Violin & Piano, FWV 8:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pka2ohiFP4M&list=OLAK5uy_nnl8iD5HmwfcwgCt_Jmf4z2fpHGE_mDSQ&index=4Ravel: Tzigane, M.76 - for Violin and Pianohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2XFjt1FrsI&list=OLAK5uy_nnl8iD5HmwfcwgCt_Jmf4z2fpHGE_mDSQ&index=7https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_nnl8iD5HmwfcwgCt_Jmf4z2fpHGE_mDSQ
Lohengrin morninghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAH_XY_NEBA&list=OLAK5uy_mMbtBIMX16VLdgSm_Kbsnrv8QTrDZ3eIQ&index=1so sad Colin Davis' Tannhauser isn't available on CD/audio, only DVD/movie.
>>131257847>no uLol, not how it works.
>>131259109Exaclty how it works.
regercels should get the rope.
>>131256790Yes
>>131260125beethovencels are even more insufferable. In fact Regerchads completely mog whereas beethovencels begin crying the moment Schubert supremacist chads show up.
>>131260704None of these sexless incels are chads like Haydn, Mozart, Wagner, and Debussy stop lying to yourself.Reger sucks
>>131260735Reger mogs cuckdyn moshart and midgner. The pussy is not even music it's genitalia or male ass. Just look at the beethovencels absolutely seething every single time a Schubert supremacist steps foot in this god forsaken shithole of a general. You don't deserve Schubertchads. Nor Regerchads.
>>131232018>Every composer has that intrinsic style that characterizes each work, Beethoven doesn’t seem to have that quality>>131234549>Composers before Beethoven writing for keyboards had nearly 0 expression
>>131260785>Reger mogs cuckdyn moshart and midgner. The pussy is not even music it's genitalia or male ass
>>131261006Then I'm afraid we will never be able to post Haydn, Mozart, Wagner and Debussy ever again.
>>131260785This but unironically
https://youtu.be/egqG3rBITJA?t=1667I've listened to a lot of Mozart in my time and I recognize this moment as a blatant reference to a piece but I can't remember which specifically. Can any of you guys help me? I feel like it's one of the piano concertos or symphonies but I'm not sure.
now playingTchaikovsky: 1812 Overture, Op. 49https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_j6P85bdhM&list=OLAK5uy_mOGJWDf7yTLnM2vAW8jEXSu6yu6xTdcow&index=13start of Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 3 in D Major, Op. 29 "Polish"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjWjua0AlqM&list=OLAK5uy_mOGJWDf7yTLnM2vAW8jEXSu6yu6xTdcow&index=13https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mOGJWDf7yTLnM2vAW8jEXSu6yu6xTdcow
idk why but I really like thishttps://music.youtube.com/watch?v=IAyFuhmwWa4
>>131263183How can you even tell that this is "classical" music? Is all piano music that doesn't fit into either category (blues, jazz, pop etc.) "classical"?
>>131263451No. The most obvious material difference between classical music for any instrument and popular music is that classical music is composed and written down as a score before being performed/interpreted by musicians while folk and popular music are primarily transmitted by vernacular performance traditions and audio recordings.
>>131263542But how do you know it's classical, did you look up the score and read it?
>>131263638My personal recognition of a piece is not really relevant to whether something is classical. But I have read along with the score to plenty of pieces, yes.
>>131263451>>131263638To add on to what the other guy said, after a while its not hard to recognize these kind of music, though there are plenty of pieces that would certainly throw people off off, at the end of the day what classifies it as art music (what people mean by classical when they aren't referring to the classical period) is what the other guy said (primacy of the score) coupled with the author's background/intent.Also, why is that piece hard for you to identify it as art music? Are you unfamiliar with 20/21th century music?https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=KHfXOO0Tvcc&list=OLAK5uy_mxP1DZpp-XbyBwqLzgnevfOB7s75QsNrA
thoughts on Kempe's Beethoven cycle?
>>131264230The 9th is an all-timer. Didn't even know the rest existed.
Can someone help this guy? I too recognize the melody but too lazy to go through Mozart pieces to find it. Surely someone here is good at putting melodies to names of pieces immediately.>>131261831
>>131257782>Nice, here's an album:>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy8wW8tnP1k&list=OLAK5uy_n_8rl8AoaGhWtCORH1bt3ycHO1QpJPehM&index=1thanks, will peep now
Cokehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6qT7G5kYyk&list=OLAK5uy_k_nTS9fImT3gGDWu0XyHrRCtaDEOXTzz0&index=1
classical music
orchestra and instruments!
>>131265079so, this is the guy that invented coca-cola?
composers rules! yay partitions
new>>131265150>>131265150>>131265150
>>131261831>>131264562isn't it close to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP9V7_fevgQ
>>131265452I thought it'd be a theme from one of the string quartets or something.
>>131265452No
the vagner meme
