CLASSICAL MUSIC

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
hoodjem, Schumann once said that he finds some "fadesse" in Haydn.

Remember that Haydn produced symphonies and other works on the essambly line. Even a great composer cannot make masterpieces every day.

I don't know and don't like Schumann's piano pieces that much (exception: "Träumerei") but I find his piano concerto fantastic and some of his songs (Mondnacht, In der Fremde ("Aus der Heimat..."), Dichterliebe ("Im wunderschönen Monat Mai"; "Die alten bösen Lieder",i.e the first and last song of that circle). Are you a pianist, hoodjem?

We must be very grateful to Schumann that he discovered Schubert's Great C Major Symphony" ten years after Schubert's death (at Schubert's brother Ferdinand) and that he managed to perfomance it (conductor Mendelssohn-Bartholdy) shortly afterwards. Schumann praised that masterpiece with some greats words (about "Mankind have not heard such music and emotions before", "The symphony has the eternal shoot of youth and will never die").
I am certainly very grateful to Schumann for his discovering of Schubert's Great C Major Symphony.

My favorite piano piece by Schumann is probably Der Dichter spricht from the Kinderscenen, Opus 15.
 

hawk eye

Hall of Fame
Kinderszenen is indeed poetry with keys instead of words. Der dichter spricht is one of my favourites too, just like Träumerei and the first one.

I actually happen to like most of his piano work, though you've got to be in the right kind of mood for pieces like Fantasy in C or Kreisleriana. Brilliant stuff but very capricious/ rollercoasterish.

Schuberts impromptus or Momensts musicaux I´m kind of always in the mood for.

The one from 13:40 on is at good as it gets.









 
Sad for Schumann, really talented, but then he screwed the nerves in his hands (if memory serves me correctly) by tying strings with weights to his fingers in order to exercise them.

A big admirer of Chopin, but sadly Chopin didn't feel the same admiration for Schumann and actually looked at him sort of dismissively.

I really like the Martha Argerich rendition of Kinderszenen for Deustche Grammophon. I myself used to play some of the Kinderszenen pieces.

I used to be a Chopin fanboi myself, but then grew up (I still like Chopin though).

Too much good stuff in classical music to talk about it in one post (or thread).

Since we are talking of piano, I find Liszt to be very frustrating. It seems to me that the good Hungarian wasted much of his talent on key acrobatics (apparently virtuosismo was very appreciated back then).

But when he searches deep down into his soul, he can come up with some haunting pieces.

 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
Some keyboard stuff.

Saw mentions of Liszt. Always liked Liebestraum No. 3. Something touching about it:


For energy and buoyancy, Bach's French Suite No. 5, Gigue:


Beethoven's Piano Concerto No. 4. That opening phrase is among the most moving in all of classical music, IMO. Fingerwork at close of third movement also stirring:

 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster

GREATEST pianist ever lived and living in history of music as humans have existed in history of time itself.
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
hoodjem, I would say that Mozart is greatly over-rated just in the sense that he is mostly called the GOAT (or even the GOAT by far). But actually his great g-minor symphony, his piano concertos KV 466, 491 and 488 (but only the extremely sad second movement), his Requiem, his string quintett KV 516, his best quartetts, his sonata KV 457 are works of deep emotion. Of course Die Zauberflöte and Don Giovanni contain great melodies.

My problem with Mozart is that his youth works are not that great and that he has composed hundreds of second class Divertimenti and so on. Exceptions are his little g-minor symphony and the Haffner Serenade.
Yes, I do agree about Mozart: IMHO he is greatly over-rated. And way too many of his works are "second-class Divertimenti."

I do not believe that he discovered that music could communicate depth of feeling and a "soul" until about K. 400.

In my opinion his goal is the lovely melody; he pursues it at the expense of depth of feeling. Too many of his works lack any depth underneath that surface of loveliness and beauty. These works thus come off IMHO as sycophantic, saccharine, cloying, and when they do "have" emotion it seems superficial, contrived, and artificial. Yes, of course, he did write some fine works but IMHO too few and too late. I very much appreciate the String Quintet K. 516 and the Fantasia for Piano K. 475.

I believe that his later symphonies are not necessarily light, delicate, and lovely--when performed appropriately. I have performances of them conducted by Peter Maag with the Orchestra di Padova e del Veneto, and these do to have depth, weight, and vigor. All the others I have heard (including Karl Böhm, Herbert von Karajan, Colin Davis, Georg Szell, Harnoncourt, Walter, Bernstein, Marriner, even Klemeperer) play his symphonies as lovely (but shallow) Rococo bon-bons. Alas.

Finally, I cannot blame Mozart himself. But when I was in Wien in 2011-13 I noted all too ubiquitously that he was being used as a marketing "tool" (in the worst sense of the word) everywhere to sell the "sweetness and charm" of "Old Vienna." They were Mozart chocolates everywhere, Mozart trinkets, Mozart tours, and dare I say, Mozart tourists in the thousands.

These did not encourage me to appreciate him (or his music) very much.
 
Last edited:

jhick

Hall of Fame
I am a casual fan of classical piano. Grew up playing mostly classical from an early age, played seriously and in competitions in Junior High/HS. Took some elective courses my first year in college. Now just play for fun and church. Here are a few of my favorite pieces that I played growing up.


For listening to, Chopin's Nocturnes are up high on the list.
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
I have some respect for Haydn's genius of invention and exploration and find his humor and wit nice but I severely miss soul and emotion, as already Robert Schumann has missed. I'm never touched when listening to one of his works.

I think his best opus are the late string quartetts and some late symphonies and "Die Schöpfung". I like his trumpet concerto.
Much damage has been done to Haydn by being labeled as "Papa Haydn," stereotyped as an old fuddy-duddy.

Yes, Haydn's late string quartets are very nice, but so are those of Opus 20, Opus 33, and the "Prussian Quartets Opus 50.

My favorite piano sonata is No. 31 in A-flat. The second movement Adagio is an exquisite gem of a deeply moving yet most simple melody. His Piano Sonata No. 60 is marvelously witty, yet again surprisingly simple. Also No. 59, which is clever, inventive without being contrived or phony. The middle movement Adagio cantabile is intimate but authentic not affected. Here is our friend Brendel playing it:

IMHO the best Haydn symphonies are No. 39 "The Fist," No. 26 "Lamentatione," No. 49 " la Passione," No. 44 "Trauer," and No. 45 "Farewell." Yes, the "London" symphonies 93-104 are better known, but these Sturm und Drang symphonies are full of inventive surprises and some elements of feeling. My favorite of the late Haydn symphonies are No. 92 "Oxford" and No. 88 with its bagpipes-like motif in the third movement. The fourth movement of No. 88 is infectious. Here is an old hack conducting a mediocre band:
;)

Not all of the best works of all composers are their last works.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
Much damage has been done to Haydn by being labeled as "Papa Haydn," stereotyped as an old fuddy-duddy.

Yes, Haydn's late string quartets are very nice, but so are those of Opus 20, Opus 33, and the "Prussian Quartets Opus 50.

My favorite piano sonata is No. 31 in A-flat. The second movement Adagio is an exquisite gem of a deeply moving yet most simple melody. His Piano Sonata No. 60 is marvelously witty yet again surprisingly simple.

IMHO the best symphonies are No. 39 "The Fist," No. 26 "Lamentatione," No. 49 " la Passione," No. 44 "Trauer," and No. 45 "Farewell." . Yes, the "London" symphonies are better known, but these Sturm ind Drang symphonies are full of inventive surprises and some elements of feeling.

Not all of the best works of all composers are their last works.
Does it stereotype him as some sort of stick-in-the-mud? I always thought it was a term of endearment, a respectful moniker for "the father" of classical music. Interpreted it almost as a sort of honorific, acknowledging the patriarch of the lineage... like all subsequent giants built upon his works.

P.S. Where are these quoted messages in your posts coming from?
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
Does it stereotype him as some sort of stick-in-the-mud? I always thought it was a term of endearment, a respectful moniker for "the father" of classical music. Interpreted it almost as a sort of honorific, acknowledging the patriarch of the lineage... like all subsequent giants built upon his works.

P.S. Where are these quoted messages in your posts coming from?
If you press the arrow of the quote, you shall find ;)
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
If you press the arrow of the quote, you shall find ;)
Ah! Thanks. Had never paid that any mind. Screen may not be as crisp as it needs to be. That "arrow" looks like one of those little crucifixes next to the names of "emeritus" patrons.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
Here is where those of us who are interested can post our thoughts on Classical Music. Thanks.
Hoodjem , I have posted many music clips on "Tennis in the Second Golden Age of Sports 1956-64", because I believe that his period was not merely the climax of great sporting achievement, but was also coincidentally the highest level of attainment of the arts, music and drama.

The reason for that, I believe, was the increasing internationalization of sports and artistic achievement made possible by the recovery from WWII and the ease of international transportation due to air travel.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
Sad for Schumann, really talented, but then he screwed the nerves in his hands (if memory serves me correctly) by tying strings with weights to his fingers in order to exercise them.

A big admirer of Chopin, but sadly Chopin didn't feel the same admiration for Schumann and actually looked at him sort of dismissively.

I really like the Martha Argerich rendition of Kinderszenen for Deustche Grammophon. I myself used to play some of the Kinderszenen pieces.

I used to be a Chopin fanboi myself, but then grew up (I still like Chopin though).

Too much good stuff in classical music to talk about it in one post (or thread).

Since we are talking of piano, I find Liszt to be very frustrating. It seems to me that the good Hungarian wasted much of his talent on key acrobatics (apparently virtuosismo was very appreciated back then).

But when he searches deep down into his soul, he can come up with some haunting pieces.

I once had a conversation with Gyorgy Sebok, the piano professor at Indiana University, and frequent collaborator with Janos Starker (two Hungarians).

I asked Sebok whom he believed was the composer who was "best suited" for the piano.
His reply was, "Well, Bach was best suited to music...but if you mean, which composer composed the most idiomatic piano music, the answer would be Liszt...sometimes when I play Liszt I get the feeling that I am flying through the air...I don't get that feeling with any other composer."
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
Does it stereotype him as some sort of stick-in-the-mud? I always thought it was a term of endearment, a respectful moniker for "the father" of classical music. Interpreted it almost as a sort of honorific, acknowledging the patriarch of the lineage... like all subsequent giants built upon his works.

P.S. Where are these quoted messages in your posts coming from?
The respectful moniker was its original meaning among musicians in the Esterhazy court orchestra. But later in the 19th and 20th centuries, the nickname "Papa Haydn" carried a rather negative connotation.

See here under "Papa" as pejorative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papa_Haydn

"Papa Haydn's dead and gone
but his memory lingers on.
When his mood was one of bliss
he wrote jolly tunes like this."
 
I once had a conversation with Gyorgy Sebok, the piano professor at Indiana University, and frequent collaborator with Janos Starker (two Hungarians).

I asked Sebok whom he believed was the composer who was "best suited" for the piano.
His reply was, "Well, Bach was best suited to music...but if you mean, which composer composed the most idiomatic piano music, the answer would be Liszt...sometimes when I play Liszt I get the feeling that I am flying through the air...I don't get that feeling with any other composer."
That's interesting, thank you.

What I always appreciated about Liszt in particular is his use of tonality that seems to my uneducated ear very pioneering, acting in a way as a precursor of early 20th Century classical music.

But he remains very frustrating to me, because I think much of his music is too superficial, specially considering that it's not due to intrinsic limitations in his artistic ability, but more because of an emphasis on virtuosistic brilliance. Same reason I'm not a fan of Paganini, for example.

This is one of my favorite Liszt pieces, the famous piano sonata. Simply brilliant.

My favorite rendition of this is the Shura Cherkassky performance (I think printed by Philipps Decca, which I own).


Argerich's, below, is also great.

 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
^^^Ouch! Poor Beethoven.

treblings, I believe that music is similary to wine: the older the better...(not in every case: I find "Yesterday" a much greater work than an average Haydn symphony).
OK. And I find it superior to an early Mozart symphony, but inferior to "Der Müller und der Bach."
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
Kinderszenen is indeed poetry with keys instead of words. Der dichter spricht is one of my favourites too, just like Träumerei and the first one.

I actually happen to like most of his piano work, though you've got to be in the right kind of mood for pieces like Fantasy in C or Kreisleriana. Brilliant stuff but very capricious/ rollercoasterish.

Schuberts impromptus or Momensts musicaux I´m kind of always in the mood for.

The one from 13:40 on is at good as it gets.

Your mentions of the improvisations made me think of something I learned about in this BBC special on Beethoven. Evidently, he did "battle" with other promising pianists. They would have piano sparring to determine the most brilliant ad lib musician. Young Ludwig was legendary in this capacity, and apparently defended his title countless times. This scene was fairly dramatic and hilarious:

 
Last edited by a moderator:

jhick

Hall of Fame
This piece posted above is one of my favorite Liszt pieces. Yes, I can share the sense of flying when listening to it.

I believe that its title "Un Sospiro" translates as A Sigh in English.
Yeah it's one of those songs that seems to send you into another dimension. The performer (Jan Lisiecki) has a great feel for the piece. Quite impressive as he was only 16 or 17 at the time he played this.
 

hawk eye

Hall of Fame
That's interesting, thank you.

What I always appreciated about Liszt in particular is his use of tonality that seems to my uneducated ear very pioneering, acting in a way as a precursor of early 20th Century classical music.

But he remains very frustrating to me, because I think much of his music is too superficial, specially considering that it's not due to intrinsic limitations in his artistic ability, but more because of an emphasis on virtuosistic brilliance. Same reason I'm not a fan of Paganini, for example.

This is one of my favorite Liszt pieces, the famous piano sonata. Simply brilliant.

My favorite rendition of this is the Shura Cherkassky performance (I think printed by Philipps Decca, which I own).


Argerich's, below, is also great.

I agree the Liszt Sonata is great, has a very ominous/mysterious feel about it.
The majority of his other works didn't quite catch me as well, though.
I guess most of it is hardly playable for me anyway or not at all, probably because of the emphasis on virtuosity.
 
I agree the Liszt Sonata is great, has a very ominous/mysterious feel about it.
The majority of his other works didn't quite catch me as well, though.
I guess most of it is hardly playable for me anyway or not at all, probably because of the emphasis on virtuosity.
I agree about the ominious/mysterious feeling.

The piece I posted above is the same way, adding that it has a little more somber feeling to it as well.

 
@hawk eye

Interestingly, about the virtuoso nature of Liszt works, it must be said that Liszt's hands weren't extraordinary in size. For example, Chopin's hands had a much larger reach than Liszt's. Yet, Chopin's works are not made in general to emphasize virtuoso aspects, and are (in general) easier to play.
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
John Eliot Gardiner's Music in the Castle of Heaven: A Portrait of Johann Sebastian Bach makes for a generally good read - just finished it.


Typical recent listening taste:





 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest


That's all for now.
Some of John Williams' Star Wars music is a near carbon copy of Holst's "The Planets" (and I love the Star Wars music). I hadn't realized for a while how many of the themes were identical. Thanks for that share.
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
Some of John Williams' Star Wars music is a near carbon copy of Holst's "The Planets" (and I love the Star Wars music). I hadn't realized for a while how many of the themes were identical. Thanks for that share.
Indeed.
 
I am not sure sacred music falls under the genre of "classical music", but it's close enough.

A very nice example of modern sacred music (for the "Shadowlands" soundtrack).

 

mrravioli

Semi-Pro
Wow. A classical music fan club on TT. I'm feeling at home. But my time for music has greatly decreased since I picked up tennis. Lol. And I devote most of the limited time to Bach and Wagner, the two GOATs (in common TT word) IMO.
 

Dan Lobb

G.O.A.T.
Hoodjem , I have posted many music clips on "Tennis in the Second Golden Age of Sports 1956-64", because I believe that his period was not merely the climax of great sporting achievement, but was also coincidentally the highest level of attainment of the arts, music and drama.

The reason for that, I believe, was the increasing internationalization of sports and artistic achievement made possible by the recovery from WWII and the ease of international transportation due to air travel.
The advent of Richter and Gould in 1955-56 by way of recordings highlighted the importance of recording technology to introduce new stars to a larger public.

Gould and Bernstein teamed up in 1960 for a great TV program on how to interpret classical music,

 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
This thread loading painfully slowly (and/or not...) for anyone else? There are other threads with lots of video files, so what gives?
 
Top