Mozart editionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnPR7foWImoThis 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: >>131477438
So what's /classical/'s verdict on Richter's famous rendition of Schubert's D.960? Indulgent and perverse? Or sublime and unparalleled?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lncNcNtGkJY
>>131498044BASED edition!
>>131498044i'm tired of people sleeping on piano concerto no 11. that is all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VV75v1sZsQc
>>131498183I listened to that exact recording the other day and enjoyed it much more than I expected.
>>131498189it's my fav recording of no 11. i quite like uchida's recordings of mozart concertos in general
For peak spiritual health, one ought to start each day with thirty minutes to an hour of Bachhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRO3J1mxL54&list=OLAK5uy_nARyYNLY3AiZ9MSY71XIOpbGx0X-ZZOo8&index=8
>tfw no Liszt 24 Preludes cycleso sad
Lord Wagner, I come before you just as I am.I am sorry for the wrong things I have done.I am sorry for the impure or wrong thoughts my mind conceived.Please forgive me and cleanse my heart.Help me to live a better way. Amen.
>>131498041That's not what cultural appropriation means, you eurocentric imbecile
>>131498722real life is Eurocentric
Die Walkure morninghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LksP9FYbFVI&list=OLAK5uy_neMKoQp_muhwSa2cAYvTGeKsSoYoYLC4o&index=1
Does anyone have some flac they could share literally anything, as long as it's /class/
now playingstart of Tchaikovsky: Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-Flat Minor, Op. 23https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqFFqixIg3I&list=OLAK5uy_m24SxbAwU26ov7TeWY53_oO7Huahzm97o&index=2Liszt: Années de pèlerinage, Troisième année "Italie", S. 163: No. 4, Les jeux d'eaux á la Villa d'Estehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezWdWNk1uAE&list=OLAK5uy_m24SxbAwU26ov7TeWY53_oO7Huahzm97o&index=5Liszt: Années de pèlerinage, Deuxième année, "Italie", S. 161: V. Sonetto 104 del Petrarcahttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jj_N7mvesI&list=OLAK5uy_m24SxbAwU26ov7TeWY53_oO7Huahzm97o&index=6Liszt: Réminiscences de Don Juan, S. 418https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ycm9tJD5Jw0&list=OLAK5uy_m24SxbAwU26ov7TeWY53_oO7Huahzm97o&index=6https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_m24SxbAwU26ov7TeWY53_oO7Huahzm97o>George LI gained international attention in 2015 when he won the silver medal in the International Tchaikovsky Competition in Moscow. Now he has recorded one of Tchaikovsky's greatest and best-loved works, the Piano Concerto No 1 with the London Philharmonic Orchestra and conductor Vasily Petrenko. The New York Times has called him a "real revelation" in the work. It is complemented by three solo pieces by Liszt, a composer who featured on his debut Warner Classics recital, judged "a winner" by International Piano magazine.
>another thread of solo piano retardation and orchestral faggotryVGH, it gets so lonely being a chamber music chad...
>>131498071Mid and not expressive enough.
It's time...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKfrIe_sNuk
>>131498931I just listened through Mozart's Requiem (Karajan) and King's Choir of Cambridge recordings of Tallis, Allegri, Palestrina, Blow, Croft. Recc me some stuff.
>>131498951
>>131498951>>131499017
>>131498940I gotta admit: this Loge is not doing it for me.
>>>131497948Ok look I’m obviously the kind of person who possesses the “I must plan everything” personality type so your particular disposition towards things doesn’t help me. Thanks anyways. I’m only going to listen to it once in the 2020s at least so I’d like to get the patrician choice and feel good about myself. Nobody actually likes Solti because he’s the normie choice and only suggested as an entry point like you’re doing and the guy was extremely prolific besides which turns me off. Karajan was also prolific but has the quality to back it up it seems, though there’s a lot of people who are very sceptical of him and his Ring isn’t very praised. I like the idea of Bohm and the provenance of his working in the Kapellmeister tradition and working himself up and focusing on making good bombastic operatic Germanic music, but nobody else seems to. Furtwängler has two different versions with questionable orchestras and one has cuts (in the better one, OF course, 1950) but he’s Furtwängler so has the transcendental whatever and has the best “interpretation”. I actually listened to part of his 1942 ninth and loved it. So I landed on Krauss and that indeed seems to be the patrician choice. But that is also bad because I feel like a fool for picking an older recording for worse soundSpeaking of Beethoven’s ninth I actually abandoned the Wagner project for now to listen to Beethoven’s symphonies because it seemed more approachable, but there are literally over a dozen recordings for 2-9. It did plant the seed in my mind of doing “referencing recordings only” but that brings me back to Solti.
>>131499358> I actually listened to part of his 1942 ninth and loved itVery based. Furtwangler is GOATed. His 1951 is also nice. And since you're not scared of hiss, I'll sneak something in.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QRIrdiVS08&list=OLAK5uy_mJanaqu4ViJZdhktHnmfDFtx96Zjnrs0I&index=9And of course, continue with Beethoven. Don't forget his sonatas and string quartets as well.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vypBzlFSXQ4
Which Liszt works aren't just virtuososlop? Listening to Totentanz rn, it's pretty good. Also got the Faust Symphony planned.>>131498824I've torrented my entire library off RuTracker, just go there.
>m.
>>131499647t. android brokie
>>131499611>Which Liszt works aren't just virtuososlop?All of them. Grow a soul, a heart, a brain, and a dick, and it will become evident to you, too.
>>131499741https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-XtfYTLi2Yhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc-WkvJWTJ8https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk4sSSw1-_MI bet you feel quite silly now.
>>131499767What do you think the point you were making was when you posted this, anon?
>>131498940Honestly, I kinda expected more. It's merely very good. Not the kind of blow-your-nips-off experience hiss is made out to be by some people.
>>131499611>Which Liszt works aren't just virtuososlop?Sonata in B minor, Dante Sonata, Années de pèlerinage, Harmonies poétiques et religieuses, all of the late works.
>>131499153wow really? he's my favorite Loge. His Immer ist Undank is beautiful
>>131499672>I pay more money for inferior products
>>131499611None are "virtuososlop" whatever that means. If Liszt is" virtuososlop" then so are Handel, Scarlatti, Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin, Schumann and everything inbetween and outside. They were literally considered virtuosi of their time. Liszt is no different, he was just a God compared to the rest of them both in technique and mastery of composition (only (slightly) rivaled by Bach, Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin and Schumann) - objectively speaking.
>>131500394>only (slightly) rivaled byOh and Mozart, of course.
>>131500394>only (slightly) rivaled by Bach, Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin and Schumannwe're just gonna pretend Thalberg, Alkan and Moscheles didn't exist, huh
>>131500408Of course.
>>131500394>then so are Handel, Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubertno>Scarlattiyes>Chopinsometimes
>>131500432Beethoven Handel and Mozart are/were indisputably virtuosi of their time. Beethoven is the most virtuoso by all means, more than Scarlatti (not sure why you singled him out).
>>131500432>>131500654The only questionable choice was Schubert. The rest are all virtuososlop just like Liszt.
>>131500654They didn't compose virtuososlop
>>131499358Furtwangler and Kraus are too hiss. If you're not gonna do Karajan, Solti, or Bohm, then do Keilberth for sure. There's always later options, but best to save those for later.
>>131500654being virtuosi =/= composing virtuososlopthis is WAY too obvious to require more questioning from you. if you still do not understand, just shut up and move on
now playingstart of Edmund Rubbra: String Quartet No. 1https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoScOWZZxS4&list=OLAK5uy_mTlrd38yZ_ZS7ztXyCobFunFHlNsPVQVg&index=2start of Edmund Rubbra: String Quartet No. 3https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMpaNybqgmc&list=OLAK5uy_mTlrd38yZ_ZS7ztXyCobFunFHlNsPVQVg&index=5start of Edmund Rubbra: String Quartet No. 4https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOFnRoqhL9I&list=OLAK5uy_mTlrd38yZ_ZS7ztXyCobFunFHlNsPVQVg&index=7https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mTlrd38yZ_ZS7ztXyCobFunFHlNsPVQVgSome lesser-known chamber music.
>>131499890I don't have strong feelings towards it myself, the 1953 Krauss is much better, especially as far as the Rheinmaidens are concerned, but the vocal performances are still superb overall. That's why people usually throw superlatives on it. >>131499358>Nobody actually likes Solti because he’s the normie choiceSolti's Ring has a lot wrong with it, but it's also just a work where a lot goes wrong in general. In the areas that matter the most, i.e. the singing, his cycle is still top tier amongst the complete cycles. The only entry in his cycle which I rarely ever turn to is Walkure. >KarajanIt's a fine Ring cycle with slower tempi than I want, with consistently good singing, even if there are some pretty moronic casting choices (DFD as Wotan). It's worth hearing, but sometimes a bit light in the voices, but that's also part of the appeal too.>I like the idea of BohmBohm's Ring is easily one of the best and most idiomatic cycles, since it's played at Wagner's preferred tempi, is excellently recorded, and has mostly great singing. The only downside is an aging Windgassen and the sometimes bleating brass. It's still the most exciting and most dramatic Ring in reasonable sound.>FurtwänglerI don't really care for the 1953 cycle since it's too slow, but the 1950 cycle is genuinely great throughout, albeit in worse sound quality overall. I rarely listen to it these days, though.>KraussPossibly has my favorite Rheingold, but the orchestra makes too many mistakes throughout, and I don't really feel the need to hear it despite the top tier singing. >>131499533Don't listen to the Hofmann Waldstein as your first one, please.
Virtuososlop is a baseless neologism coined by a mere handful of people who have never actually listened to the likes of Liszt or Paganini and are just looking for something popular to hate.
>>131500935>Don't listen to the Hofmann Waldstein as your first one, please.Why not? It's literally the best Waldstein. I only wish to unhear all other Waldsteins just because of how good Hofmann's is.>>131500966Correct.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qx25fB9HqxU
>>131500935You haven't heard Goodall or Luisi or Mark Elder yet?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2lrexTBtkc&list=OLAK5uy_kW-alwDLnzRkqd1RpatnS1mipjGU52je0&index=38
>>131500966No, it's a real phenomenon of especially the19th century that is distinct from classical aesthetics
>mfw surrounded by hiss sistersI just worry some newbie will come by, be like "alright, time to finally try those Beethoven piano sonatas I've heard so much about", get recommended some dusty ass performance from before WW2, and get turned off thinking "oh... if classical recordings are like this, maybe this genre isn't for me"
>According to Jorge Bolet, Hofmann's performance of the 111 sonata is on the "God" level, so much so that Bolet would not play that Sonata in his career!Damn.>(And then we also can never listen to Rachmaninoff playing that sonata. Two major losses for humanity)Damn.
>>131500432>>Scarlatti>yeslolno
>>131500989Because while it's an amazing performance it's out on its own little island and is quite demented. You need a reference for a more normal performance to actually hear what makes it special. Especially as a newfag.As Callas would say of learning a performance, it's important to be straight and true to the score and learn the work, before you then add your own idiosyncrasies to it. I feel the same toward listening to performances as well.>>131500995I have. They're both shit. They're just not on the list.
>>131501020It's more like you dislike 19th century music and can't comprehend/enjoy it beyond the surface levek virtuosity. Because it is not distinct at all. Yes, it's a different from its preceding era (classical), just like classical is different from its preceding era (baroque).
>>131501051>I have. They're both shit. They're just not on the list.I named three cycles!
>>131501051Alright. That's fair point. You do need reference to realize its greatness, it was stupid of me to rec Hofmann.
>>131501056No, the majority of the music I like best was written in the 19th century.
>>131501051>Because while it's an amazing performance it's out on its own little island and is quite demented. You need a reference for a more normal performance to actually hear what makes it special. Especially as a newfag.I consider RachAnon to be a friend but they have zero understanding of principle of recommending newbies performances that'll actually get them into the genre and to stick around versus just throwing their favorites at them despite the fact it has a high percentage chance of turning them off entirely. It's actually quite amazing and should be studied in universities the world over.
>>131501059*They're all shit
>>131501072That's not surprising, given that 19th century has more than double 18th centuryhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Composers_by_century
>>131501196Not the point.
>>131500666if you're so dumb you are objectively unworthy of being alive, maybe
>>131501020nope, sorry
>>131501209It kinda defeats your point. Yes, music you fancy more was mostly written in the 19th century - but that applies to almost any classical listener.
>>131501261That honor goes to Isoldes before Tristans, maybe
>>131501310Your whole justification for pretending virtuososlop doesn't exist was that I don't like 19th century aesthetics, which isn't true
>>131501345Not true. You may like some parts of 19th century aesthetics, but that's just given due to the sheer variety and quantity.
>>131501364So you concede the point that this has nothing to do with appreciating 19th century art.
now playingstart of Frank Bridge: String Quartet in E Minor, "Bologna"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg3VVXMraoU&list=OLAK5uy_l5cXuV85KeXVFqovlcpXZfulU5b4xRmok&index=2start of Frank Bridge: String Quartet No. 3https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIrFnPnj1HE&list=OLAK5uy_l5cXuV85KeXVFqovlcpXZfulU5b4xRmok&index=5https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_l5cXuV85KeXVFqovlcpXZfulU5b4xRmok>Perhaps no other British composer of the first half of the twentieth century reveals a stylistic musical journey as great as Frank Bridge. His early works follow in the late-Romantic tradition bearing a kinship with Fauré; later Bridge comes close to Delius. After the First World War, however, his music became intense and chromatic. In his String Quartet No. 3 (1926), Bridge rubs shoulders with the early works of the Second Viennese School. Commissioned by the American patroness Elizabeth Sprague Coolidge, it fully revealed for the first time Bridges advanced mature voice. The works language shows kinship with Berg and Bartók; the twelve semitones are constantly in play; octave doublings are avoided, and the music is driven by a relentless momentum. Bridges First String Quartet was written in haste in the space of a month in response to a competition organized by the Accademia Filarmonica, Bologna. Of the 67 quartets submitted only Bridges received a mention dhonneur.
>>131501399It does, since that's what you stated in the first comment:>No, it's a real phenomenon of especially the19th century that is distinct from classical aestheticsAssuming that you fail to appreciate Liszt because you call his music "virtuososlop", I replied:>you dislike 19th century music and can't comprehend/enjoy it beyond the surface level virtuosity. Which I still reckon to be the truth. You fail to appreciate and/or comprehend the "virtuosity" (a very vague idea, by the way) - which is a part of 19th century music.
>>131501472Brahms 2nd piano concerto is very hard, but it is not virtuososlop. If you don't understand why, then you'll never understand classical music.
Brahmshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Pmb322WJOA&list=OLAK5uy_lG9BC4FT2sdiLdH3ib74Aer6X7_1xCu0o&index=1
I guess I'll give Hamelin's Liszt one more tryhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BH7oLZGOyk&list=OLAK5uy_lY15pAx2TkGQyNeYSrl3aMqISxdyuQ558&index=2
>>131501494Sorry, but it absolutely is a virtuososlop piece. Just like Liszt's sonata in B minor. I'm afraid Brahms is even more virtuososlop than Liszt, to quote a great pianist, it's "chimney music" that isn't really for the piano but an organ. It needs extra virtuosity to manage due to its shitty piano writing. If you don't understand why, then you'll never understand classical music.
>>131501855Not what people mean by virtuososlop. I chose that example precisely to demonstrate your misunderstanding that it simply means hard to play.
>>131501855This general becomes more retarded by the day.
>>131501887You don't get to define words. Yes, it perfectly fits into virtuoso category.
>>131501989You're the one using it in an atypical way.
Ok but Liszt's Sonata in B Minor is actually virtuoso slop. Sad!
>>131502003Not really. Not a single respectable pianist in this world would consider Brahms 2 to NOT be a virtuoso piece. Have you even stepped into a conservatory or are you just talking for the sake of talking?
>>131502069I hope for your sake you're pretending to be retarded.
>>131502048Liszt's sonata in B minor is one of the greatest pieces ever composed, most detached from the word "slop". As much as I like Brahms 2nd pc, it fits more into the "virtuososlop" category. The idea itself makes no sense, however if we were to force rational meaning to it, it would point directly to Brahms' piano music.>>131502078I hope for your children's sake they are aborted.
>>131502107Idk, either a) you genuinely believe that Brahms' piano pieces are the kind of virtuoso showpieces that were pioneered by 19th century concert pianists to wow audiences or b) you're pretending to be retarded to be provocative on 4chan, and I am in fact being generously to assume the latter.
>>131502048It's virtuoso but not slop.
i try searching 'rachmaninoff violin concerto' but nothing comes up, HELP
>>131502158A) Any and all piece of art is explicitly or implicitly made to impress an audience. We could get into deep philosophy but I will leave it to Darwin to explain the inherent nature of art and music:>As neither the enjoyment nor the capacity of producing musical notes is of the least use to man in reference to his daily habits of life, they must be ranked among the most mysterious with which he is endowed... I conclude that musical notes and rhythm were first acquired by the male or female progenitors of mankind for the sake of charming the opposite sex.19th century has nothing to do with "impressing audience" by historical accounts either, let alone by evolutionary observations which we already discussed. There are accounts of Bach trying to impress nobility. Handel and Scarlatti competing. Beethoven challening other composers to 'musical duels' and much more. Impression is the very purpose of art.B) I'm not the one pretending to be retarded imbecilic brainless moron by calling masterpieces of the piano literature "slop", but someone else in here certainly is.
i try searching 'chopin string quartet' but nothing comes up, HELP
Mendelssohnhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVimzV_MM_c&list=OLAK5uy_mih5p5gJRW2oxGiDDlkNtGuih45nf9QvM&index=1
>>131502160Liszt's whole career
>>131502234This kind of reductive reasoning sure saves you from having to address musical facts, but it doesn't change the qualitative differences between these pieces. People rarely play Brahms' piano pieces at competitions compared to Liszt precisely because they're hard to play in a way that doesn't translate to that kind of audience response. Same with that Franck piece people accuse of being cursed or whatever. It's simply not what people mean when they call Liszt, Alkan, Thalberg, et al virtuososlop. But you know this and are pretending to be retarded, presumably as an excuse to repeat the same things you say every other thread as if everyone here hasn't heard them.
>>131502394>People rarely play Brahms' piano pieces at competitions compared to Liszt precisely becauseof what our beloved Pachmann said. But yes, also because they're just uncomfortable.>But you know this and are pretending to be retardedKnow what, that retarded people use meaningless words to virtue signal their (lack of) intelligence? As that anon pointed out:>Virtuososlop is a baseless neologism coined by a mere handful of people who have never actually listened to the likes of Liszt or Paganini and are just looking for something popular to hate.Although the word itself is new, the idea isn't. But I reject its validity entirely. It is nothing more than anti-intellectualism masked as intellectualism.
>>131502552thanks for proving my point
Scolding uppity anons with detestably wrong opinions is always a pleasure. Total Liszt supremacy.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqKGyhsPWvAThe fact that Brahms fell asleep listening to this sonata, I think, demonstrates a massive (or, at the very least, a modest) intellectual gap between the narrow-minded conservative, lacking sensetivity to musical sonority and its intrinsic connection to harmony and the form, as well as an overly rigorous, unoriginal approach to composition, and, the progressive, genius innovator of the golden age of culture with masterful command of the instrument and radically original approach to musical architecture.Brahms composed in the shadow of Beethoven, Liszt transcended it entirely.
Anyone here listen to Conlon Nancarrow?
Anyone here a fan of Ernst Helmuth Flammer?
>>131502632>Nancarrow is best remembered for his Studies for Player Piano, being one of the first composers to use auto-playing musical instruments, realizing their potential to play far beyond human performance ability.No, and I don't think I will.
>>131502701Why is there space between the greentext and the regular text? Wait.. are you from /reddit/??
>>131502605Liszt wishes he was Brahms.The average joe could hear a handful of tunes from Brahms and recognize it. Can't say the same about Liszt.
>>131502723>Can't say the same about Lisztthat sounds like a (You) problem
>>131502723Liszt is way better than Brahms, the only cool thing Brahms did was fuck Schumann's wife.
>>131502723>Can't say the same about Lisztthat sounds like a problem common to many besides (You)
Favorite recording(s) of Schumann's Piano Sonata No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 22?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjlO0ABn3vQ
>>131502734>fuck Schumann's wife.I don't think he did, anon
>>131502734>the only cool thing Brahms did was fuck Schumann's wife.(true, btw)
>>131502701Sounds like the AI slop of classical music.
Johann Baptist Joseph Maximilian Reger (Final Edition)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9OhhnU75u4https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8zOMZwHq_ghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAVsBCKWkcghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46OC3X_z6Gc>Reger’s clarinet quintet is the last of his chamber compositions. It was completed just 10 days before his sudden death of a heart attack. Unlike either Mozart or Brahms, Reger quite unobtrusively embeds the clarinet into the contrapuntal complex of the strings, obviously trying to restrain the idiomatic style of playing to which the clarinet is inclined. He tried to match the tone of the strings very closely and took especial pains not to allow the quintet to degenerate into a concertino. The entry of the main theme in the first movement, Moderato ed amabile, makes this quite clear. It is shared between the clarinet and first violin, without either instrument taking the lead. Formally Reger keeps to classical models. The opening movement follows sonata form but has three themes, the receives considerable attention and is used again in the third movement. The four movements are very closely linked by thematic material. In the second movement, Vivace, the theme resembles that of the first theme of the previous movement. The slow movement, Largo, with its plaintive sighs and dense scoring is particularly impressive. For the finale, Reger, as did Mozart and Brahms before him, chooses a theme with variations. In this case, there are eight variations. For the most part serenity is maintained throughout this autumnal work.>Classicism meets rich, sophisticated late Romantic chromaticism in ways one who has never run across Reger might well imagine to be impossible.Final Editon Bonus Track:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b22lEWZEALQ>couldn't find a single review on this piece, but I quite liked it, and it's his final work, left unfinishedHope at least some of you had fun going with me on this journey. See ya next year.
>>131502852>Johann Baptist Joseph Maximilian RegerSounds like a YuGiOh character name.
>>131502877Speak on that
Schuberthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXfWbv4Hgpg&list=OLAK5uy_l1rgtFJl-0jPPAKLueeOsDQiloD99YkF0&index=22
Thoughts on John Cage's 4′33″?
is Barenboim's recording of Chopin's Nocturnes secretly the greatest set of all-time?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kECtMxTNL7E&list=OLAK5uy_kNJmYRRrXuNqXhZ80V5QDwu_LZSSByJ7M&index=17
>>131502907my thoughts:
>>131502907>>>/mu/>>131502915no
>>131502895this guy is so talented, but I refuse to listen to his recordings. after his awful WTC.
>>131502720>Guy who's a fan of an artist who uses automated machines can't even defend Nancarrow and gives an automated 4chan response Can't even say I'm surprised
>>131498044Classical music is best if you play it or have a knowledge of music theory. I’ve been playing it, and of everything I’ve played in the last few weeks, these are by far the most interesting pieces. They have a structure that other genres (mostly pop, jazz, and metal) lack. You can really feel the difference. Jazz and metal can be and are quite inventive. But much of these genres, at least on the metal side, fail to offer the range of dynamics found in classical music. Anyway, I’m going to get back to practicing.
>>131503437no one cares
>>131503511>exploring classical music>I don't dance, I don't sing, I don't play an instrument, and I don't even believe in GodUnless you're a music lover, classical music is a hard pass for non-creative people. And even for music lovers, liturgical music is the biggest filter. After all, a large part of the canon consists of liturgical music
>>131503544You misunderstand me. What I meant was that no one cares about your post. I've no idea what you're saying, because I don't care, and neither does anyone else.
>>131503551How come you guys enjoy century-old gossip and myths? I have nothing against that, but half the posts are about things that never happened. Is the community supposed to be this cringey?
>>131503591no idea what this means
HOLY SHIT
>>131501989Then who does? "Virtuososlop" is not in any dictionaries that I know of.
>>131503105>after his awful WTC.You have to appreciate his unique, singular vision.
For me, it's the first movement of Schubert's D.664 piano sonata.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10M_YjDQHos&list=OLAK5uy_nhJVXiuvH5ukxjyB3ElJBCUHmm6dBPtLc&index=6
The public perception of classical really is at all-time lows, huh...
The ultimate debate. Ashkenazy vs. Muti vs. Luisi for Scriabin's symphonies.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNIrXcbYh7Q&list=OLAK5uy_lx84nLbrV-vFcieAQfmeQnXO2RGLseIe0&index=10
>>131505110Golovanov and Koussevitzky is all you need.
>>131499358Ok everyone I’ve narrowed it down to a debate which I believe is paradigmatic of my two divergent paths regarding Wagner. Fundamentally, it is Bohm vs Furtwangler with their Tristans and Rings (1950). And I’m going to lay it out here. Is Furtwangler simply a scam? I’ve sampled both and Bohm is just better? Notwithstanding the fact that there are two different Furtwanglers for the Ring - he actually has a secret 1954 recording of Die Walküre which… nobody likes - there being two versions just irks me, I would’ve picked Furtwangler if I felt the transcendentalism and spiritualism and whatever. But I do not. Perhaps I am a lesser being. I just prefer Bohm. Please vindicate my feelings so I can move on.
>>131505634>which… nobody likesI like it. Plenty of other people do too. If you want just one conductor for Wagner and you want to move on without becoming autistic about details, then Bohm is a perfectly fine choice.
>Wolfgay Amadeus Mofart>Frederic Choppedin>Claude DeBussy>Sergay Cuckmaninow>Johann Sebastian Bachdoor>Joseph Gaydn
This must be the funniest video Dave has ever made. https://youtu.be/1OLM8GvaKq4?si=dT4DsNrValzFPAfsMy sides.
>Gayve Hurditz
>>131505634>he actually has a secret 1954 recording of Die Walküre which… nobody likesI thought it was one of the most widely lauded recordings of Die Walkure in existence? My advice is to stop looking for general impressions like 'transcendent' and 'spiritual' and start looking at the specific phrasing and tempo control of specific passages to compare Furtwangler on.
>>131505513...who?
>>131505634The Bohm is so much more listenable.
>The later Schoenberg is for Sibelius 'an interesting theorist, a philosopher perhaps, but not a great composer.' 'It is the most pretentious snobbery on the part of audiences to applaud the later Schoenberg as they do; there are not twenty musicians in the world who could follow the structure and inner logic of any recent Schoenberg work or even get a rough idea of the composer's meaning at one hearing in a concert hall. I flatter myself that I have a sensitive ear—far more sensitive than that of the average concert-goer. And yet when I hear for the first time the more complicated Schoenberg works I am completely lost. I have to study the score closely to see what he is driving at. How can the casual concert-goers or the affectationists make head or tail of such music? Alban Berg is Schoenberg's best work.'
>>131506393Greatest Scriabin conductors of course.
>tfw since this neurotic newbie has been here, paralyzed by his indecision to choose a single Ring cycle to listen to, I've already listened to the Ring three different timesjust pick Solti, Karajan, or Bohm and move on with your life, got-DAMN
Scriabin, Rach, Chopin and Shostakovich who had the best preludes?
>>131506532Chopin
>>131506532Chopin and it's not even close.
>>131506532Scriabin and it's not even close.
>>131506532Debussy
Merry Kirkmas, /classical/!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUHpUXlsvbI
>>131506893Ya no I gotta go with a serious set
>>131506928What's the matter? Afraid you might hear something?
>>131506532Scriabin
>>131506532Scriabi :3
>>131506532Chopin.
>>131506532Let's be honest, Chopin and Scriabin are a level above everyone else.
now playingstart of Prokofiev: Cello Sonata in C Major, Op. 119https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD5aCfIH2Kg&list=OLAK5uy_miqFgyzxh3z4t_jNofEDhafvqk4he_tnI&index=2start of Kabalevsky: Cello Sonata in B-Flat Major, Op. 71https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st-pSR7nBFY&list=OLAK5uy_miqFgyzxh3z4t_jNofEDhafvqk4he_tnI&index=5start of Myaskovsky: Cello Sonata No. 2 in A Minor, Op. 81https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pq3lr8JXJk&list=OLAK5uy_miqFgyzxh3z4t_jNofEDhafvqk4he_tnI&index=7https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_miqFgyzxh3z4t_jNofEDhafvqk4he_tnII love Prokofiev's Cello Sonata so much. It's genuinely in my top contenders to be put in my will to be performed at my funeral wake.As for Kabalevsky and Myaskovsky, even though they're both 20th century Russian composers, they provide an interesting contrast, as the former is overtly modernist and forward-thinking, whereas the latter, especially in his cello works, is conservative with an eye toward the past of romanticism. Combined with Prokofiev's Cello Sonata which is right in the middle of this spectrum, this program provides a nice juxtaposition and journey, while giving an all Russian cast of composers.As for the musicians, I've heard a couple things by each of them before (Grimwood has some Faure and Liszt, Walton some repertoire cello pieces), and both are solid.
*stretches the length of his pieces by repeating the primary theme several times*heh, nothin' personal... kid
>>131507365>writes better music than anyone ever did before him and almost every except like 5 composers at most after him
>>131507365You mean>stretches the length of his pieces by unnecessarily repeating the entire exposition where he already repeated the primary theme several times
>>131507429>>writes better music than anyone ever did before himDamn, it's crazy that there was no such thing as baroque music back then
>>131507365sigh fine I'll listen to his Quintet in C major again
now playingstart of Liszt: Piano Sonata in B Minor, S. 178https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkB01SRhLec&list=OLAK5uy_ke0BbzlqvBrbE216e44AbX8KYoljefrYY&index=2start of Liszt: Années de pèlerinage II, Italie, S. 161, Petrarch Sonnetshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNNytbTWzP8&list=OLAK5uy_ke0BbzlqvBrbE216e44AbX8KYoljefrYY&index=7Liszt: Années de pèlerinage II, Italie, S. 161: VII. Après une lecture du Dante "Fantasia quasi Sonata" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnKLFEGqidU&list=OLAK5uy_ke0BbzlqvBrbE216e44AbX8KYoljefrYY&index=9https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_ke0BbzlqvBrbE216e44AbX8KYoljefrYY>Angela Hewitt’s notes for this important new album describe a teenager’s moment of revelation when she first came to appreciate the epic masterpiece that is the Liszt Piano Sonata. Here we have a heart-felt recording where this palpable sense of wonder is manifest alongside Hewitt’s enthralling technical facility at the keyboard.>The programme is completed by the second half of Liszt’s dazzling second Année de pèlerinage collection: the three Petrarch Sonnets and the noble Dante Sonata, the latter composed as a fund-raiser for the Bonn Beethoven monument in 1839.>‘[A] superbly serious performance … that eschews all personal vanity, all preening mannerism and flamboyance but which, with strength in abundance, locates the still centre at the heart of Liszt’s raging heroics … this is possibly the very finest of Angela Hewitt’s many recordings’ (Gramophone)My obsession for Liszt's Piano Sonata in B minor and survey of recordings continues. Liszt and Hewitt ostensibly seem like they wouldn't mix, so this'll be interesting. At the very least it'll be a different take, less virtuosic, a greater focus on the emotional content. Will it work? We'll see.
The problem with Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin and all those early Romantic guys—yes, Mozart is an early Romantic too—is that they simply wrote too many notes. If they'd just cut a few, it would have been perfect. But no, they make too many demands on the ear.Take Schubert's String Quintet. The first movement is transcendental, but even that stretches things to the limit of good taste. Then, almost an hour later, you're left wondering when this thing is finally going to end. There are only so many quarters of an hour one can spend listening to the same man's thoughts.
>Ring Cycle is recorded at Bayreuth
>>131507679The brass sound is terrible, but I'm relatively okay with the acoustic otherwise. The strings sound amazing there, at least. It's important to put it into context of the other ring cycles out there, Bohm's is simply the one that has the least amount of annoyances for me as far as the sound, quality of performance, and quality of singers are concerned.
>>131504832Acknowledge, maybe. Appreciate? Not.
It is time.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2HnwhENqFI
>>131508051My immediate thought upon the entry of the Rheintöchter was "wow the audio quality is actually really good." I might have to delve deeper into the depths of hisstory...
once again, it's pronounced Bye-Ruth
>>131508005what is your favorite recording of the Ring Cycle? I've always been partial to Janowski's from 1983 and Furtwangler's La Scala performances from 1950
>>131508154NTA; I believe this post and chart is theirs >>131500935
>>131508154I like both of those quite a bit, >>131500935is my tier list.Furt's Scala cycle is almost something I would listen to frequently, but I find the audio quality in Gotterdammerung to just be a bit too hazy and weird sounding. The balance between the soloists, chorus, and orchestra is quite strange. It's better in the other three operas, but there are a number of other things that annoy me. I still enjoy that cycle a lot, though.
Nicht gezögert, rasch gezahlt!
I refuse to believe anyone would subject themselves to the compromised audio quality of Furtwangler's 1950 Ring more than one a year at most.
Enough with the Wagner
>>131508586You're more than welcome to raise your topic of choice.
The Wagner will continue until morale improves.
>>131508127It's actually
>>131508572Check this out for lolz >>131505876
>>131505876>>131508688I did laugh a few times, I'll admit.
>>131507365personnel*
>>131505876>>131508688>>131508772buy an ad
>>131505110Ashkenazy, obviously; nothing "ultimate" about this debate
>>131505634>Bohm vs FurtwanglerSolti >>>>>>>>>>>>>Please vindicate my feelingsNo. Solti.
>>131506532Chopin obviously, but I listen to Shostakovich more
>>131508860No.
Once again, Strauss' Metamorphosen has the power to save the worldhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkbWcvEPeo8
>>131509011why doesn't it, then
now playingstart of Tchaikovsky: Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 35https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LByuvTFt0Z4&list=OLAK5uy_kgPk_hTJC9xkdiXE1-QbFj4hzdhHRLx4k&index=2Tchaikovsky: Souvenir d'un Lieu Cherhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1uoAwDjJew&list=OLAK5uy_kgPk_hTJC9xkdiXE1-QbFj4hzdhHRLx4k&index=5start of Sibelius: Violin Concerto in D Minor, Op. 47https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a81pbdmfe2o&list=OLAK5uy_kgPk_hTJC9xkdiXE1-QbFj4hzdhHRLx4k&index=5https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_kgPk_hTJC9xkdiXE1-QbFj4hzdhHRLx4k>(Tchaikovsky) "warm, relaxed and romantic, has the right degree of restraint in the obvious lyrical moments... it is completely convincing" (Sibelius) "Oistrakh in the Sibelius concerto is of course to be recommended - this is a fine bargain, especially as Ormandy, too, is in excellent form. The Philadelphia strings are both very strong and very impressive" (Gramophone)Decided to go old school on this one. Even I love Oistrakh!
>>131509046Lack of engagement. see: >>131505046
>>131509069sounds pretty powerless to me then
>>131509076Just because no one's found the holy grail doesn't mean it isn't powerful, ya feel?
>>131509083the holy grail isn't real
>>131509103The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist.
>>131508051Hm... no, I don't think this is all that impressive. Merely good. Honestly did not like it as much as Keilberth.
>>131509112sure thing bud, have fun changing the world or whatever
>>131509117You're really no fun.
>>131509114Because you can actually hear the orchestra in Keilberth's. I suppose for folks who are all about vocals, yeah, the hiss recordings have merit. But for those who approach it from a symphonic background, like I do, I need that orchestral clarity.
>>131508937Based me too
>>131509131I also didn't like the vocals as much. A touch too much acting instead of singing.
>>131508903>Soltioverrated, especially his insistence on mimicking the horrendous Bayreuth sound. Even Karajan's Wagner is better than Solti's
>hisssssssssssHey! Turn that down!
>>131509225*cough*
>>131508903Solti is horrendous you can't hear half the orchestra during the funeral march because he focused so much on le epic brass even though the majority of the Ring is written for strings
>>131509500>Solti is horrendousyeah yeah yeah
brass > woodwinds > percussion > strings
>>131509225I don't listen to hiss but I enjoy the humming.
>>131509500Nope, wrong, sorry.
>unironically listening to Soltiel em ay oh
>>131509520>>>>>> triangle >>>>>>>>>> fart machine >>>>>>>>>>>> voice
>>131510036>proudly announcing one's earletismdaring
why do critics rate Vivaldi so low compared to Bach? Goulding places Bach as the greatest composer in the classical canon, but doesn't even place Vivaldi in the top 35, despite Vivaldi being Bach's favorite composer and primary influence. Is it because of the meme popularized by Stravinsky suggested that he wrote the same concerto 400 times?
Best Mahler cycle for orchestral transparency?
>>131510263Chailly. Either one fits that bill pretty well, he is a very transparency oriented conductor.
>>131510263Chailly and Boulez.
Alexander Scriabin: The Complete Sex Recordings
>>131510036Solti is actually an exemplar of quality. Brahms, Schumann, Mahler, Bruckner, Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Elgar, Wagner, Liszt, Mendelssohn, Strauss, Haydn, Bartok, Schubert. Even if he often doesn't quite make my favorites for a composer, you can almost always count on him to be, at worst, pretty good and exciting.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzpaFBO6ecU&list=OLAK5uy_lgsd_0ZLj_hWxP5W-zBp-RHLYH7hQo7P0&index=4
>>131510562>tfw your gf buys you the Lettberg set for your birthday
>>131510263Abbado
>>131510110 Vivaldi was one of the influences, especially for the concerti, but not his primary influence overall. Buxtehude and north German contrapuntists were his primary influence.Also Vivaldi was only discovered in 20th century, he was pretty much forgotten after his death.Also who the fuck is Goulding? If you mean G*uld then his opinion matters as much as my nextdoor neighbor's.
Sir Michael Tippetthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGbMikBGaYA&list=OLAK5uy_kh2dbo3Tdvl44gsWGC7ErACJ6VZ1cffYE&index=1
>>131506532Scriabin obviously
>>131510036What's the matter hissboy? Afraid you might hear something?
if you don't like Elgar, we can't ever be friends or sleep together, sorry!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UawoRxR-a0&list=OLAK5uy_ntw1GwxXn13IVFXmaZPp4YkxXhRevVZGg&index=1
Hissfags don't actually like classical music, they like the idea of listening to it. The hiss allows them to drown it out as white noise while they browse TikTok.
>>131510758it's the musical equivalent of people buying old, hard-cover books for the look of it, hardly reading more than a few pages
>>131510772It's the equivalent of my brother (who I love dearly) when he hears me listening to classical then goes, "ah, I would love to listen to this in a home library (he doesn't read) while sipping some whiskey and smoking a cigar"
>>131510758Funnily enough, the hisster brothers are the ones who browse TikTok the least.
You know what, guys? I've decided it's time to go through all of Haydn's piano sonatas. Anyone wanna join me? I personally will be using the Buchbinder set, but Bavouzet, Derzhavina (which, if I don't like Buchbinder's, is the one I'll switch to), and McCabe are also all acceptable.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cymc5VlnP_Q&list=OLAK5uy_nXexzmtAxPqMYgBOA8kITzQYWtPnM_VtM&index=1>“The Viennese oracle on the core literature of Haydn, Beethoven and Brahms,” is how The Philadelphia Inquirer has described the pianist Rudolf Buchbinder, while Huffington Post has praised him for “perfect phrasing, magnificent technique and an unparalleled love of his instrument”. Renowned for his meticulous study of musical sources, he here performs Haydn’s complete piano sonatas – captivating works which prove that Haydn deserves to be known as ‘the father of the piano sonata’, not just ‘the father of the symphony’. His sonatas exercised a decisive influence on Beethoven, the composer with whom Buchbinder is identified above all.
>>131510839If we keep it one sonata a day, maybe. I've been thinking about it too.
>>131510838Without your cracked version of the app which turns every video black&white like it was filmed in the 1930s, you mean.
https://www.tiktok.com/@hilaryhahnofficial/video/7682842454558625038>redditors throw a hissyfit over men dating younger women>roasties looking geriatric at 40
>>131510888What are you doing, anon?
>>131510851The first is very simple. Like a preprogrammed tune you'd fine in some old school children's electronic or composed by a music student. It's charming, of course, but if someone busted it out during a piano recital, I'd probably be a little offended, like it were a joke or act of protest by the musician.
>>131510888And you're still a fuckless loser with no friends.
>>131510801something something rich mahogany
now playingstart of Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 1 in C Major, Op. 15https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2nTVnkKaLw&list=OLAK5uy_lDGlRLb_wzWg19wrQuUAgn7DqLSgeYarc&index=2start of Beethoven: 6 Piano Variations in F Major, Op. 34https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4wuNugzJ6o&list=OLAK5uy_lDGlRLb_wzWg19wrQuUAgn7DqLSgeYarc&index=4https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_lDGlRLb_wzWg19wrQuUAgn7DqLSgeYarc>Celebrated pianist and renowned Beethoven specialist Rudolf Buchbinder releases his second album with Deutsche Grammophon. In celebration of Beethoven's 250th anniversary this year, the album captures a breathtaking live performance of Beethoven's Piano Concerto No. 1 from 2016 between Buchbinder, longtime friend Christian Thielemann, and the Berlin Philharmonic. The concerto is paired with Buchbinder's 2019 recording of Beethoven's Six Variations for Piano, op. 34.I don't care, I love all five of Beethoven's piano concertos.
>>131510716The problem with Solti’s Ring is sometimes you can’t hear anything except for brass
>>131511265as it should be
I enjoy bullying Solti's Ring too for all of his moronic conducting decisions, but despite that it's still unfortunately a reference recording since it's one of a few with tolerable singing throughout.
Brahms won
>mfw listening to Notre Dame Organum, Franco-Flemish Renaissance, Franco-Italian Baroque and not a single G*rman besides Mozart, Haydn, and a little bit of WagnerLife is good anon's, life is good.
You guys really do evaluate recordings way differently than I do. For me, I like Solti's Ring because of the power, the intensity, the energy.
>>131512248>a little bit of WagnerWhich opera?
>>131512591Well, one of Solti's main issues is that he didn't really understand how the leitmotifs should be prioritized. So even though his Funeral March is technically louder and more powerful than many others, it's actually lacking in terms of the intended intensity / power of the scene, because the death motif is tossed to the side for the sake of the sword / siegfried motifs, which overpower death, which is the exact opposite of Wagner's intention. The sting / power / intensity of death is therefore nonexistent in Solti's version. There's lots of little things like that in his cycle. Like, you would expect Solti's brash brass to come in handy in the Act 3 Prelude of Siegfried, where Wagner actually asks for it. But nope, he's pretty tame:https://litter.catbox.moe/7f8qapkhzupan8xt.mp3Where is the p -> f crescendo that Wagner asked for? Bohm gets the effect exactly correct. https://litter.catbox.moe/9wnny73jk8n36lep.mp3And really I could go on, there's tons of stuff like this. But there's also tons of stuff I could bitch about Bohm's or Janowski's or many of the other successful cycles. Any recording of Der Ring is a series of failures and compromises, and it's up to you to determine which ones you're comfortable with making. That's why in my tier list (>>131500935) the top choices aren't "great" but merely "good enough"
>>131512716I appreciate the effort post, but this only leads back to my overall approach: instead of choosing any one recording, rotate. I don't listen to Solti's every time, that'd be crazy. For that, I agree with much of the criticisms you and others have laid out. And to add one of my own, Solti, as we all know, often lacks nuance (this is kinda your criticism too).But sometimes I just wanna hear the Ring in full-blast power with wonderful singing and that's what Solti offers. So those who outright dismiss Solti are crazy to me.
So now that the dust has settled, is this the greatest Chopin 2/3 recording of all-time?2https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRI0ROQX6_E&list=OLAK5uy_nr3WUzD3nJHAwHDaO2nQ4KYoYedKALD-g&index=23https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBpyb7Je0aU&list=OLAK5uy_nr3WUzD3nJHAwHDaO2nQ4KYoYedKALD-g&index=5
>>131512881no
I wish I enjoyed Mozart's piano concertos.
I wish I enjoyed something other than Mozart's piano concertos
>>131513153You don't think this sounds good?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbLc8WHtJlU
>>131513159>alban berg quartetI wasn't planning on vomiting today.
>>131513192:O
Satie is Chopin’s true heir.
>>131513192stop pushing your fingers down your throat then, Stacy
>>131513208Debussy had a better understanding of the piano.
>>131513319you're replying to cheap bait
>>131498568Arpad joo made one
>>131513319Of course - and as >>131513342 said i’m being somewhat glib - but satie and chopin share a propensity for what i’d call gothic melodicism, a certain edge, which debussy lacks.
I like all recordings of all pieces that I think are good. I am indifferent to all recordings of all pieces I am indifferent to. I dislike all recordings of all pieces that I think are bad.
>>131512695Right now I'm working through Das Rheingold. I was content with just listening to the Ring without Words but I feel like it cheapens the Wagner experience. However with life and everything, its hard to listen to and digest a 2-3 hour Wagner opera especially since its in another language.
>>131511265And that's a good thing.
>>131513392>gothic melodicism, a certain edgeI'd love for you to try and explain that in actual musical terms instead of just saying random shit without a thought behind it.
>>131513794Huh, I thought you would have preferred one of the lighter operas like Meistersinger or Tannhauser, considering your other favourite composers. One of the good things about getting into opera is that after enough time you become moderately conversant in Italian, French and German and following libretti becomes quite easy. It used to be common for educated people to pursue the study of languages even when they had no plans of being able to speak them, considering its usefulness with situations like this.
>>131513933Deep-fried Scriabin?
>>131513392>>131514909Not who you were replying to, but I think I understand. I'd guess it has something to do with the general dark, melancholic atmosphere, and an aesthetic fascination with the morbid, macabre or "weird". Debussy usually doesn't have this. So I'm thinking of minor keys, suspended harmonies, and obsessive repetition or slow transformation of motifs. My first association reading "gothic melodicism" would have been Scriabin, but Chopin and Satie are good shouts as well.
>wake up>drink a lovely cuppa>put Bach while walking to workhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcosBkNGjPIFeels good man, sometimes life is good
>>131510263The obvious answer here is Mengelberg and Walter. But no one will tell you this, because they can't hear the inherent horizontality of the old school, through which the true transparency can be achieved.
>>131515332>horizontality [...] through which the true transparency can be achieved.Why's that?
I've found it, the single worst recording of Beethoven's Egmont:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nmji8QcxAo
>Wolfgay Fagadeus Moshart
>>131515418Harmony as we know it emerged from pure polyphony, specifically the counterpoint tradition of the western art music. It is the foundation and the highest form of the classical music, on which every great classical composer relied, even the chordal late-romantics. Counterpoint itself inherently relies on meticulous transparency and that feature is implied by 'horizontality' - each voice is (almost) equally important and distinct, they don't blend into one mush of sound. Whereas pure harmony, without any smooth voice leading, is 'vertical' - which means the focus is on harmony exclusively, without any regards to the melodies buried within inner voices. All of this applies just as well to interpretation: if you seperate voices by dynamic contrasts, articulations and especially rhythmic flexibility and rubato (in other words, delayed notes), you get closer to something that sounds like this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PScJkkQPwwE (see the 4th symphony)Which is precisely what Mahler intended, a horizontal approach that is also present in Mengelberg's Mahler. Whereas if you ignore most of that, you get very primitive and boring vertical version, perfected by the worst conductor of all time:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRb-gtVQTVQWhere voices blur and the composer's expressive intentions are ruined.
>>131515564Alright but not every instrument of the orchestra is separated by voice. Does a 'horizontal' approach to interpretation also help to bring out transparency of sound among the non-distinguished instruments?
>>131513794desu Wagner’s libretti (aside from Meistersinger) are all pretty bad.
>>131515593In that case, you cannot achieve true transparency. Voices that are in unison create unique sonority and are usually intended to do so. If the 'non-distinguished' instruments (such as winds) have independent, distinctly melodic phrases, they are intended to be heard clearly, requiring horizontal approach (which includes not just dynamic contrasts but rhythmic flexibility and rubato, which is often neglected in modernist approach).
>>131515672nta but it goes without saying that words matter in opera, and that's especially true of wagner style opera, even if you think the words suck. although i suspect most people who think wagner was a bad writer are just suffering from a modern aversion to 19th century cultural trends. what's more, the story and characters more than make up for any flaws in the language.
>>131515727But Furtwangler was notorious for the orchestral clarity of instruments in unison.
>>131515493basedbasedbasedbased
>>131515758final stage of HIPeria, unfortunately terminal.
>>131515734It depends on what kind of "transparency" you mean, I guess. Furtwangler was "notorious" for delayed voice entrances, so to speak. Which is part of the true horizontal approach. Whereas Szell is notorious for separating only by dynamic contrasts, every note of every chord is played at the exact same time (so it's vertical). When Furtwangler plays unisons, one voice is usually delayed by milliseconds. I don't think that necessarily creates "transparency", because I think the motion itself creates transparency, not a single chord or an interval. The notion of transparency is directly tied to contrapuntal motion, in my view.
>>131513594hmmbased
>>131515758Oh, I was disappointed by that comment when I saw it. Because I like the channel and hoped he'd do some Mahler and Bruckner as well.
Szell's mahler 6 is the best recording of the piece
>>131515884Based, anyone who hates it is gay
>>131515856Same. Lazy fucker can't be bothered to formally analyse some of the most famous composers in existence.
>>131500714Seems like Shostakovich and Debussy were an influence. Nice music
>>131515758>>131515951>>131515856I guess that whole TV show/movie cliche where characters wholesale dismiss repertoire composers is a reality.>You like Brahms?>I prefer Debussy....why not both? lol. but I guess some people really do be like that.
>>131515957:DI liked it a lot too, which when we're talking about lesser-known chamber music, is often hit-and-miss. Glad you enjoyed! If you want more, check out the ensemble's (Maggini Quartet) discography, they have more recordings of similar lesser-known string quartets.
>>131515884>>131515892Nothing S*ell ever made is above 0/10.
>>131515968This kind of conversation makes more sense for conductors than composers.
>>131515991Hey, you're tellin' me, but like I said, I see it in media all. the. time. One example I've posted a few times,>I see you like opera. Two tickets, Don Giovanni.>Yes. Not my favorite. I lean toward Penderecki.like wtf lol
>>131515495Kek
>>131515495lal
>>131515991meanwhile SharthoAnon:>B-b-but Moshart le... underreddit! Moshart edition #923, Moshart edition #924, Moshart edition #925, Moshart edition #926, Moshart edition #927, Moshart edition #928, Moshart edition #n, ... , Moshart edition #n+1, ..., Moshart edition #m, ..."listen Moshart [Moshart Link]", "Why Moshart [generic question]?", *Sees a question*, Answer: " Moshart!", "Here is my list of GREATEST COMPOSTER(s): Moshart, Bach and let me think of a choice that will make me look educated and cultured...hmm... Schittenberg! My top 3!">inb4 denial; inb4 schizo-accusations; inb4 failed rebuttal
>>131516135lol sheesh
Just looked in the archive to see if there's been any threads about Bax and I saw a string of /classical/ Ops over many years about Bax that were deleted. Poor Bax poster has spent years of his life for trying to make Bax Ops and was too late for most of them.
Mozart was not a composer, he was a composterhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C78HBp-Youk
>>131516272lmao
>>131515968>>You like Brahms?>>I prefer Debussy.That at least makes sense as the inversion of a historical opinion that would have been commonplace at one time. I mean if you have 19th century conservative taste in music it would make sense you hate Debussy, and maybe vice versa.
>>131516397Fair point. I still think it's a strange way of speaking, like we should all seek to be tethered to a singular composer, lol.>You a Brahmsguy?>No, I'm a Debussyguy.like we're discussing philosophy or political theorists. Platonists, Aristotelians, Nietzscheans, Rawlsians, Marxist, Maoist, Kantian, etc
You can't simply enjoy both Brahms 4th and Clair de Lune. It doesn't make any sense. You have to prefer one over the other. In fact, you must hate one and love the other, choice is yours.
>>131515493What is in your opinion the best one? Most powerful and dramatic perhaps. I'm not entirely satisfied with the recordings I know.
>>131516439I'll let you know when I find it.
>>131516439*teleports behind you*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzEJR95Rkio&list=OLAK5uy_lHZbfFDlFtQOyapG3N7yr4-ILB1eWhhyw&index=9
>>131515332I'm pretty sure he just meant transparency in terms of the clarity of the instruments that he can hear.
>>131516413>ike we're discussing philosophy or political theorists.Interesting comparison. But SHOULDN'T music be discussed that way? It's certainly a quirk of the modern psyche that artworks of widely divergent styles and qualities can be appreciated and loved within a single brain. But wouldn't it be more natural for the artistic styles that we love, say if it was produced by and representative of a unified culture into which we were born, to have a discriminating effect on other styles? That seems to me to be the state of affairs in most great periods of art, when art was considered fundamental to life and culture as a representation of values. Is it possible that being open to all styles is eroding the appreciation of any style in the world today? Perhaps classical music has become devoid of a once inextricable cultural baggage that served to deepen people's understanding of it?
NEW>>131516586>>131516586>>131516586
>>131516571There is. Take myself for example. When it comes to lesser-known, second-and-third tier composers, I only listen to that stuff from the late 19th century on, aka, closer to our lived experience. I wouldn't ever listen to anything lesser-known, second-rate contemporary with Beethoven, Mozart, or Bach. Which is to say, the great stuff transcends that. Of course, I'm not saying any composer or artist is unassailable, everyone is gonna have greats they don't care for, but not to narrow extent of being an acolyte of a single composer is my point, or even just a few.
>>131516604Lol, I agree, I was not advocating for being a one-composer exclusionist.
>>131515672They have their moments.
>>131516135This but with a picture of a gigachad
>>131516730You wish, SharthoAnon, you wish.
>>131515968>You like Brahms?>I prefer DebussyAnon these kinds of exchanges happen all the time here. And its not just limited to composers, but even claims like how anything that isn't a symphony is bound to be inferior because bigger means better etc.
>>131516962Again, you're missing the point. If someone says they don't like Brahms, fine. If someone says they don't like the romantic era, fine. If someone says they prefer modern and baroque, fine. But to respond to "do you like Brahms?" with "I prefer Debussy" is basically a non-sequitur, because it suggests one can only like composer, and instead of it being Brahms, it's Debussy. All of it is silly.Again, akin to "are you a Maoist?" and replying with "I prefer Stalinism", you feel me?
>>131504359If anyone wants a listen:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmPrzy9vujU&list=OLAK5uy_lnQ1zOw11TIE4hWIdcztJLjfDW00EJRy4Not for me, but I'm not a fan of most keyboard instruments anyway.>>131507356Listening to it right now.>>131508595But you turn any topic into W*gner. Thread becoming exhausting to read. For real, make a separate general and jerk each other off there.
the vagner meme
