Check out this rarity - Brahms Piano Concerto No 1 with Dimitris Sgouros and the SWF Sinfonieorchester Baden-Baden conducted by Gerd Albrecht (May 14, 1998, Franziskaner Konzerthaus, Villingen) [APE lossless format]:-
@ukdavepianoman completely disagree with this comment, some of the most expressive playing I have heard on a Brahms concerto. mechanical? woody? where?
i swear.i have heard every type of music there is to this world.and i can say it with certainty now.at the end of this movement,i always-ALWAYS-get the chills.i just hope i can be that good in the piano one day
Este video debe ser bien antiguo porque el Maestro Barenboim aún se veía joven. Toca bien, pero me gusta más como director que como pianista (opinión personal). Bueno, y para que hablar del concierto en sí. Todos sabemos que Brahms fue un gran compositor de obras para piano y orquesta.
Barenboim is the musician of our time. Nobody did work so much as him and do so much different works during his long carèer. He knows nearly all repertory which is common and not so common in the concertprograms, for orchestre and for piano... in Paris he did up to three different programs per week (as conducter and as pianist)....
@VivaRenata Yes Renata I have a tendancy to agree...... however! I am slightly bias, I did not want him to marry Jacqueline Du Pre in the first place.
@davidoff9764 I have been unhappy about the interpretation of Romantic music for a long time. But I had the privilege of hearing the Canadian pianist Marc-André Hamelin in Edinburgh only two weeks ago, playing Beethoven's 4th concerto. And was amazed - a living, innate sense of rubato and cadenzas for the 1st and 3rd movements that he himself had composed.
Anyway - that marriage has become a subject of memoirs and movies - but she was a wonderful cellist and I heard her once, in Chicago.
@gingervytis I have a stack of his album's. The lower note's seemed to over modulate a bit, but listening to a song on youtube isn't the best source for sound. I guess I'm a bit out of date cause I also have his ten record gold album set of chopin's 32 sonata's 33 1/3 LP's.
Barenboim is maybe not the best in this concert, but Celibidiache is PERFECT. Is a very grat version of maybe one of the three best concerts for piano -remember Beetoven fifth, Chopin, Liszt, and Mozart, also.
A general comment here is that Brahms music needs time to be understood. I couldn't disagree more; Brahms is absolutely transparent; what you hear is what it is, and you can catch it perfectly in just one or two hearings. On the other side, we could have Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Berg or even Wagner. For those you sure need time, but not for Brahms.
By the way, an excellent performance, one of the best I know. Thanks for posting.
@javierqatar Depends on personal experience, I suppose. But I can say that Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Debussy, Stravinsky impacted me immediately and it was because they seemed to have strong imagist qualities. Shostakovich is often criticized as being glorified film music (which in many cases is a fair judgement). Brahms is different, so complex and rich that I had to be patient, had to think in order to understand and love it. Much like the work put into a fulfilling relationship.
@maestrojeremy As far as impact is concern, no doubt Shostakovich, Mahler or Prokofiev are far higher than Brahms, a composer that looked back rather than forward... But understanding "modern" composers is much more difficult: melodies are complex, harmonies oftenly disappearing, structure is sometimes intrincate, etc. Brahms work is much more simple. In fact XX and XXI centuries music is made "against" Brahms, never following him. His music died with him, though his quality is out of question.
@javierqatar Actually, that's not true. If you were to try and study Brahms, especially the symphonies, you would find a deep complexity in counterpoint that is still perfectly logical. You simply don't find that with Shostakovich or Prokofiev. As far as XX and XXI century composers going "against" Brahms, that's also false. Read up on Schoenberg and his thoughts concerning Brahms. Score analysis and research can do wonders. I only say this because I think you're missing out on Brahms.
@maestrojeremy Don't get me wrong: his 1st symphony is one of the best, his 1st Piano concerto is still my favourite piano concerto... Regarding counterpoint complexity, agreed. But that's all. The era of tonality was reaching an end, and Brahms was still composing "his" music. Whatever Schoenberg said, I find his music has little in common with Brahms. Tannhäuser sounds much more modern than his 4th symphony, and it was composed 50 years earlier! Brahms influence in music history is thus small.
@javierqatar In your terms of modern is more influential (what I interpreted), Tchaikovsky didn't offer much new, if at all, but he did write, arguably, many of the world's most popular melodies. While this isn't Brahms-speke, I wanted to test your logic with another composer. Regardless, the music is divine.
@javierqatar What you hear is what *you* get, maybe. Listen harder and you might hear in Brahms what Schoenberg did. And forget the 1st symphony and 1st piano concerto for a while; those works are obviously grand, but composed when Brahms was still playing the role of second order Beethoven. His real masterpieces were to come later.
By the way, the depth of Brahms is in the intricacy of his motivic development. Absolutely transparent? Like an abyss. Peer deeper!
@ueblondon I agree entirely. It is not only my favourite Brahms but also magisterial in its design/composition. Extraordinary and outstanding masterpiece.
It works for me............... I love the tempestuous element in the 1st movement I have always been drawn to Gilels interpretation...... but this works
The horn solo at the very beginning brings me back so many memories that I nearly cry every time. I listened to this during my sophomore year in high school and those memories really attached to this piece.
And btw, while I adore Barenboim, his stormy character is quite imposed in this interpretation, a more elaborate interpretation would be Rudolf Serkin's, he's less tempered :)
Brahms' music has always been - with few exceptions in his earlier works - quite subtle, the first time you listen to Brahms' you'll probably feel like listening to a cacophony of sounds, but listen carefully, the main theme is usually played by the most obscure of the instruments, don't let yourself be dragged to follow the wood-winds for too long, the piano and strings alternate bass and treble here, keep with them, they'll set the tone.
@Umslopagas I agree. Brahms is hard to follow at first. I gave up listening to his symphonies twice, but third time I FELL IN LOVE with them. You have to hear the individual melodies carefully.
you know im not a classical music afacinado. with that said i cant judge the technical aspects of this. i just dont feel this music. is this supposed to be a stormy piece of music? I am asking any1 who knowledgable about classical music or perhaps brahms in general.
@raysalsa1 Are you asking about the concerto as a whole, or just this first movement. Because as a whole, it represents Brahms coming into the later part of his compositional career whereby his unique exotic european sound is deflty folded into the purity and balance of classical form. So, even in this first movement, it is not supposed to be stormy, or indeed representing anything other than the power of pure music. That was what Brahms was all about (also the reason he was "different"
@raysalsa1 when starting with Brahms you will know and "get" his music through repeated listenings. Unlike Mozart and Tchaikovsky which is ear candy and grabs you at first listening, Brahms is soul food and the taste must be acquired. The reward is there. stay with it.
@raysalsa1 It's supposed to be more, a piece of Art and maturity. The sound is not as showy as it really is considering professional pianists have injured themselves playing this concerto but since this movement is so stretched out people can't really tell. It's not as obvious as the Rachmaninoff Piano concerto no.3. Cuz styles are completely different. In the Rach 3 there r just so many notes. In the Brahms it's really stretchy with large leaps.
@1illtown i've thumb up your comment but man i heard this on the ABC classic in Australia and i've been looking for this for like ages and when i came to this page i click on that colossal moment and bang it was that same experienced i had on my headphone connected to my mobile. What a moment we all share that many people will never be able to experience.
Sorry to disappoint everyone. I think Danny has over-analysed this. I honestly think this is Richter's themesong. I loved the younger Danny playing some of the Beethoven Sonatas - especially to so called "Moonlight Sonata".
It's seems there are 26 people who are right daft!
Brahms is by far, one of the most the most talented composers of his period.
This is a fine example of his un-matched composing capabilities. The depth and passion with which he writes can move even the coldest of hearts to tears.
This concerto truly unlocks the infinite beauty that is a piano.
Not to mention how well it was embodied and preformed by the extraordinary gentle playing.
brahms is one of a handfull, if that many composers who can sustain a large work..where everything flows inevitably ..this work is incomparable . its interesting that to me brahms never gets boring..even schuberts large scale works become ponderous where he joins sections and his developements..where brahms inherited from mozart and beethoven..the rarest gift ..thematic developement..liek bartok said about brahms.."he has inexhaustable inventive powers"
@mikejones1770 This is an insightful comment... musical greatness is manifest, in my opinion, by what we as listeners come to regard as the ineluctable (or as you note, inevitable) sequence of one note after another. Have you heard Geza Anda perform this work, by the way? With von Karajan in 1968, on DG. I uploaded today. I'd be interested in your thoughts. Thanks.
Like many of Brahms' compositions, there are numerous flashes of brilliance (the part from 8:02 to 9:05 is epic), but there are also numerous sections so boring they put me to sleep.
I dunno... i think this dude looks too stern even before he starts. He must have studied in a German conservatory, and you know you can't trust them Germans... even though I have owned 3 German cars. Anyway, I think the piano is the wrong brand for this little ditty. They should just use a 6 foot Kohler I think. Yes, that would do fine. And what's witth the conductor dude's shirt? It's too tight. And the first violinist is not even looking at the spots on the sheet!
Pity this is the most seen of Brahms 2d interpretations on Youtube. An absolute lack of subtlety on Barenboim's end and too much on Celibidache's. Piano and orchestra could have played their parts in separate rooms... Barenboim getting the deluxe suite, of course.
Jean-Guy from South of France : Celibidache and Barenboim together , the result can only be a fantastic firework ! Congratulation to the artists and to You Tube.
Its not the best reading of the work i have heard (the best interpreter in my opinion is sviatoslav richter)... still it is pretty decent... the tempo feels slightly "lagging" in my opinion although this can be quite subjective...
hey, check out much better performance by Boris Berezovsky on my page. I still need to re-upload the first part of the first movement, cuz youtube screwed it up and it´s only music with one picture without any video... but still... great music to listen to!
What a beautiful concert!! full of the Brahms' wildly romanticism ... I can't avoid mentioning the best Brahms' 2nd played ever... Moscow, May 31 1968... performer, Claudio Arrau... the concert that made Emil Gilels to cry of emotion, saying after the concert he could't play Brahms' concerts again... I'd like have been there !! :O
I'm sorry to see all the fuss... This is beautiful music played well. No need to freak-out folks, just enjoy the music for your own sake. At the end of the day, all that matters is what YOU feel inside- not someone else. Musicians should stick together!
that sort of defeats the purpose of the comment box now doesnt it. debate is a good thing. however, being a cellist myself, and having played this piece numerous times with different piansts, see no problems with this interpretation. i like it
@fbager of course you know why they are fighting.... everyone wants to seem to know something about music.... but infact the people that know about music sit back and enjoy music rather than erect a constant debate with others ... i find that just sad and completely unnecessary
@shinobi1311991 Yes you're absolutely right very well put. Perhaps my earlier comment was an overreaction on my part. Barenboim is the last person I would think to have a dogmatic view about music. I personally love debate and was just annoyed at some of those ignorant comments that have been long buried anyway.
@fbager Unfortunately, the 'better' the music is to those of us who like this sort of music, the worse it tends to be to those who prefer more modern sorts of music. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the web seems to be made of haters. It's not just music that gets them, look at any tech-related video, and you'll almost certainly see a huge flame war between Mac, Windows, and Linux fanboys.
If people want to say their opinion on something,I think they should. We just have to learn,that we don't have to judge each others thoughts. Then there will be no fights etc.
@fbager If people want to say their opinion on something,I think they should. We just have to learn,that we don't have to judge each others thoughts. Then there will be no fights etc.
This is one of the most monumental of piano concertos. I remember attending a concert at the now extinct Lewisohn Stadium in NYC. I was expecting to hear the Brahms first piano concerto and instead heard the second played by Moura Lympany. At first I was disappointed. But then I was glad. Brahms spent a good deal of time perfecting his compositions until he was finally satisfied.
Well, Barenboim does as much as one can do with this piece. I've never liked Brahms, but Barenboim keeps your attention throughout the piece, and prevents it from becoming boring.
You're foolish for thinking, apparently, that not a single piece Brahms wrote was boring. All composers have their bad days, and this piece, I'm sad to say, was one of Brahms's bad days.
you said brahms was boring not his pieces, and if you think this piece is boring you have no appreciation for art. go back to your style of music coz we dont wanna hear you insult one of the greatest composers in history. no one hear cares about your opinion so dont try to convince them that brahms was boring, your just a trolling random with nothing better to do then insult people that few, including you, cant even compare to.
and im proud to think brahms is never boring coz i appreciate him.
No, I didn't...and he wouldn't have taken it well. I admit it.
To be fair, Brahms was incredible at the TECHNICAL aspects of composition - the musical architecture of his pieces is pretty much beyond compare. However, most of his pieces fail to communicate anything on the level of the mind or emotions...with the very clear exception of his later works, some of which are just incredibly moving.
In short, I only find Brahms's later works to be worthwhile.
Well... To each their own, obviously. But the loss here is all yours.
I remember some years ago playing his op.25 and op.60 and then I had to replace Akiko Suwanai in the Tchaikovsky Trio in the second half. I absolutely adore Tchaikovsky in general and that piece in particular, but after the quartets it just felt like cabaret music.
The ignorance of your comment on Brahms is crass. "Musical architectre of his pieces is pretty much beyond compare, however most of his pieces fail to communicate anything on the level of mind or emotions" ?!? What empty non-sense, dressed in pretense of big words. I wonder if Brahms himself is rolling in his grave...
Or maybe you're insensitive and mistake technical proficiency in the art of composition for actual expression and communication. Maybe the "moving" quality if this piece is entirely a figment of your imagination.
Sorry. Not buying it. Again: big words, no sense.
If you would be 1/2 of what you say you are, you would know that technique and "expression" go hand in hand, whether in composition or the playing of an instrument. "Expressivity" and "emotionality" are subjective terms that denote one's capacity to coordinate his artistic resources towards an overall end, creating effective musical statements in the process.
@KhagarBalugrak In fact , only great technical abillity (aka skill of coordination and synthesis at high speed and intense focus) can produce high expressivity.
Your statement, that Bramhs uses a great musical architecture but doesn't touch the "mind or emotions" is LITTLE specific and HIGHLY subjective. You could use it as a personal thought at the best, but in no way as an opinion of authority.
@KhagarBalugrak In fact , only great technical abillity (aka skill of coordination and synthesis at high speed and intense focus) can produce high expressivity.
Your statement, that Bramhs uses a great musical architecture but doesn't touch the "mind or emotions" is LITTLE specific and HIGHLY subjective. You could use it as a personal thought at the best, but in no way as an opinion of authority.
@KhagarBalugrak In fact , only great technical abillity (aka skill of coordination and synthesis at high speed and intense focus) can produce high expressivity.
Your statement, that Bramhs uses a great musical architecture but doesn't touch the "mind or emotions" is LITTLE specific and HIGHLY subjective.
@theViolinDreamer, music isn't subjective. It's objective. Our experience of it is subjective, but music as an external, real thing does exist. Either any give moment in a piece is powerfully expressive, or it isn't, or perhaps it's somewhere in between. And of course this is heavily modified by the performer(s) themselves. But in the end, whatever is played has a certain objective amount of expressiveness. We may never be totally accurate in our perceptions, but we must try.
I do agree with most of your arguments about musicality and technique.
But expressiveness is not objective, it is a word with a constantly varying terminology.
Maybe the word that would fit better with your description, would be expressiveness according to what the composer wants: style. This is much more objective. You can hear when people put their emotions in a higher priority than the composers.
I do not see that as negative, but I think it is disrespecting the composer.
There is no way that you can tell if someone is expressive, if you don't use an MRI scan, maybe even that won't produce an definite result. It doesn't matter. What matters is aesthetics.
A term that's more objective is being musical. You can be expressive and not musical. Being musical is a blend of the composer's indications(the objective part) and your own interpretation along those lines (the somewhat subjective part).
Think about it though, trying to subtract universal statements out of aesthetics is vane, especially when the composer never indicated that he created conceptual art (I think and I hope that great composes like Brahms created pieces first for beauty and then logic.
@shinobi1311991 Music socially was always an escape from the absurdity of real life, if you take that away what remains is nothing of real significance).
Music is like a drug: if you feel a certain way that makes you happy, why would you reflect on this experience. Why mix anthropocentric concepts that do not apply to everything into beauty?
Dream Theater are not musical nor as expressive(probably), but I like them.
Kapustin is not a musical composer most of the times, I still like him.
Lady Gaga is an attention-seeking artist of no particular musical originality, but I enjoy her melodies, they create certain emotions I can relate to strongly.
@shinobi1311991, expressiveness must be objective and located in the external world if it is to have any reality at all. There MUST be truth about various pieces and whether or not they are expressive or not, just like there is objective truth about, for example, whether someone was angry or not at any given moment, or joyful, etc. That's why debate, analysis and investigation of pieces is so important - it helps uncover the truth that would otherwise remain hidden from us.
@shinobi1311991, it's true that all of us project emotions onto certain composers, which makes it difficult to be objective and honest in our evaluations. That does not mean, however, that objectivity and truth are impossible to achieve, or that truth is nothing but our thoughts and fantasies, and therefore doesn't really exist. Truth DOES exist; it must, because the pieces we listen to are creations in their own right; they aren't merely our mental projections.
First of all because I know where this is going I should state that I am not religious, and that I am 99% sure that there is no metaphysical truth of any kind, and even if there is it is not transcendental, it is just different (another dimension or something).
Nevertheless I leave this 0.000001% that anything that I can't prove completely wrong (like that all existence is not real besides my own) might be true, or plausible.
@shinobi1311991 If you ever read Carl Popper his viewpoint in this matter is that "you can only prove something wrong". Which although it is spelled in a paradoxical way, bears great importance. It means that all absolutes are paradoxes.
You saying "Truth does exist" is circular logic therefor a logical fallacy.
You do not need to justify existence, at least existentially. Even if you are dreaming this is an alternative reality.
Are you guilty that when you are in a strong REM sleep you are not conscious of reality? No, because what matters is what you feel. Aesthetics. I am sad that there is no unifying theory in physics or philosophy, and of course religion. I would kill myself if I had the guts, but then I think to myself that direct emotions are much more real and material than thoughts. That's when I go back to ignorance (conscious ignorance) like Sisyphus.
After I analyze a musical piece I try to listen to it as if I ve never analyzed it before, because it is of much more instinctual and psychological value
@theViolinDreamer, technical skill and musical skill are related, but not the same. The ability to decide whether something is right or not is inborn and intuitive. You can train in music theory all you want, but in the end, one's ability to make musical decisions is something you can't teach.
Furthermore, technical skill and expressivity are related, but they are different levels of music. It IS POSSIBLE to have great technique but no expression in one's playing. I've heard it many times.
@theViolinDreamer, therefore, it is also possible to be wonderful at, say, orchestration, rhythm, etc. and still communicate nothing in a composition. And sadly, this piece is just such a piece, as far as I can tell. It feels like musical bloviating...it says nothing, despite its grand architecture and all the rest of it.
What exactly is ignorant about KhagarBulagrak words? The way he feels many music lovers have felt throughout the past 150 years, starting with Richard Wagner, Anton Bruckner, Peter Tchaikovsky or Hugo Wolf.
Brahms has always been a composer whose technical excellence and intellectual honesty are beyond dispute, but who does not appeal to all musical minds alike (as, say, Bach, Mozart or Beethoven do).
@KhagarBalugrak I also thought that also, until I played cello for the first time in a Brahms symphony (No. 1). As we worked through the 2nd movement, through which I always slept through, in recording or in concerto, I realized how great a composer he truly was. The 4th movement was even more amazing. He's really NOT boring if you really get to know him, not just listen casually. For the latter Rachmaninoff, Tchaikovsky and Mozart would be better.
best work of Brahms along with the violin concerto.
XavifromSeville 1 week ago
Check out this rarity - Brahms Piano Concerto No 1 with Dimitris Sgouros and the SWF Sinfonieorchester Baden-Baden conducted by Gerd Albrecht (May 14, 1998, Franziskaner Konzerthaus, Villingen) [APE lossless format]:-
bit(DOT)ly/xTIUne
cvxmelody 3 weeks ago
The conductor ,Celebidache ,was born in the same city I was born ! I'm so proud :D
andreea140794 1 month ago
my favorite piece of Brahms... brilliant...
irmagvarama 1 month ago
Star Wars, the movie, has similar sounding motifs throughout.
creativevibrations 2 months ago 2
@creativevibrations
There's a Star Wars movie??
DonalG45 1 week ago
Awesome.TY bugopolo for posting this gem of a performance
paulostroff99 3 months ago in playlist Brahms
Idiot video director. Close-up at 8:40. Nothentire stage there, moron.
A little heavy-handed so the piano is heard well?
robertgift 3 months ago
@jscalise1 I hope you understand that I mean - the performer, not the composer)))
klizmun1 3 months ago
where was Justin Bieber?
MyMrsBob 3 months ago
My favourite Brahms. I have come across better performances but it is a delight to hear Barenboim on this performance.
aristotle358 3 months ago
This concerto is so difficult, right up there with Rach 3 and Prok 2.
The section from 8:40 to 9:20 is ridiculously difficult but thanks to the lousy camera work you don't get to see this.
Not engrossed by this performance, it's a bit mechanical and wooden in places.
ukdavepianoman 3 months ago
@ukdavepianoman prok 3 too, though less difficult, but still difficult ever
TheSoken123 3 months ago
@ukdavepianoman completely disagree with this comment, some of the most expressive playing I have heard on a Brahms concerto. mechanical? woody? where?
gnatural 2 months ago
@gnatural don't bother with those people, they think playing soft makes things expressive.
philateliceun 1 week ago
Triumph of mediocrity
klizmun1 4 months ago
the conductor is such a badass.
iam23years3old 4 months ago 2
gORGEOUS!!!!!
espinaca79 4 months ago
OMG!! Baremboim has aged too much! I just watched him conduct Jaqueline Du pre's version of Elgar..!
espinaca79 4 months ago
Wow. Such a contrast from the first concerto.
whneo97 4 months ago in playlist More videos from bugopolo
i swear.i have heard every type of music there is to this world.and i can say it with certainty now.at the end of this movement,i always-ALWAYS-get the chills.i just hope i can be that good in the piano one day
DeathShotMe 5 months ago
baremboin loves hammering his pianos
rodstartube 5 months ago
I like his heavyness on the keys, it suits.
Havelneft 5 months ago
I love how the concert grand is always at the forefront of the stage in classical music.
avq5 5 months ago
Barenboim is right on the money but the orchestra was a bit slow responding at times.
vintagehonda83 6 months ago
At 6:01, the conductor was like, "What the hell...?"
IAmTheSwordmaster 6 months ago 4
@IAmTheSwordmaster lol
rodstartube 5 months ago
Astounding.TY b for posting
paulostroff99 6 months ago
es lo maximo!!!!
nuevopianista 6 months ago
Este video debe ser bien antiguo porque el Maestro Barenboim aún se veía joven. Toca bien, pero me gusta más como director que como pianista (opinión personal). Bueno, y para que hablar del concierto en sí. Todos sabemos que Brahms fue un gran compositor de obras para piano y orquesta.
paulyps 6 months ago
pestone
Oblomov18 6 months ago
Es mi obra favorita, simplemente extraordinario!
fercorno1 6 months ago
Barenboim is the musician of our time. Nobody did work so much as him and do so much different works during his long carèer. He knows nearly all repertory which is common and not so common in the concertprograms, for orchestre and for piano... in Paris he did up to three different programs per week (as conducter and as pianist)....
uhartchristian 7 months ago
seriously have to give applause to this guy, he's one of the best conductor.
imduyung 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
il fanan il jadeed Zahed Sultan yu3lan musabaqat REMIX lil album “Hi Fear, Lo Love”, wa il ja2iza il uwla $1000!!!!
lil mazeed min al ma3loomat, shoof il video clip lil musabaqa 3ala youtube: Zahed Sultan: "Hi Fear, Lo Love" Open Remix Competition
Shaarik ilyoum!!!
ZahedsMusicAlbum 7 months ago
06:01 "What the fuck was that, man?! Dont do that anymore."
rasj5150 7 months ago 27
The maestro does it again! A magnificent work!
kingjepoy 7 months ago
I had the priviledge to play this concerto. Indeed, it is, as you called it, one of the most colossal moments in history of music...
adi827 7 months ago
@adi827 so did i, it was marvellous
afertyus1000 7 months ago
LOL. This conductor cracks me up. He shoots these cold, disapproving looks at sections of the orchestra. See 5:57
obdeniye 8 months ago
Excelente orquesta y buena dirección. Un maestro el pianista. Tengo que conseguirme mejores parlantes.
Yugmasinhel 9 months ago
We should all be grateful ? that Barenboim turned to conducting. I can't even listen to this - .......
VivaRenata 9 months ago
@VivaRenata Yes Renata I have a tendancy to agree...... however!
davidoff9764 9 months ago
@VivaRenata Yes Renata I have a tendancy to agree...... however! I am slightly bias, I did not want him to marry Jacqueline Du Pre in the first place.
davidoff9764 9 months ago
@davidoff9764 I have been unhappy about the interpretation of Romantic music for a long time. But I had the privilege of hearing the Canadian pianist Marc-André Hamelin in Edinburgh only two weeks ago, playing Beethoven's 4th concerto. And was amazed - a living, innate sense of rubato and cadenzas for the 1st and 3rd movements that he himself had composed.
Anyway - that marriage has become a subject of memoirs and movies - but she was a wonderful cellist and I heard her once, in Chicago.
VivaRenata 9 months ago
Magnifique!!
cuoylyf 9 months ago
Superb! TY bugopolo for posting.
paulostroff99 9 months ago
Brahms, a giant...and Barenboim absolutely perfect !
MrGunterguerrero 10 months ago
@MrGunterguerrero splendid!!
IsisSlovenska 10 months ago
execellent performance, but he should lightened his touch a bit. If you touch is to heave in the lower octave's, it sounds a bit mushy.
Klaaaan1 10 months ago
@Klaaaan1 I'm sure Barenboim would be most interested in your expert tutelage.
gingervytis 10 months ago
@gingervytis I have a stack of his album's. The lower note's seemed to over modulate a bit, but listening to a song on youtube isn't the best source for sound. I guess I'm a bit out of date cause I also have his ten record gold album set of chopin's 32 sonata's 33 1/3 LP's.
Klaaaan1 9 months ago
Barenboim is maybe not the best in this concert, but Celibidiache is PERFECT. Is a very grat version of maybe one of the three best concerts for piano -remember Beetoven fifth, Chopin, Liszt, and Mozart, also.
Kolnikov 10 months ago
Look at the SIZE of that piano! it's HUGE!!
pobz100 10 months ago
Listening to this concerto tonight, I realize that it's combination of the horn and the piano that contributes to the beauty of it for me.
mmcrosbie 11 months ago
Brahms looked backwards for inspiration, mostly Beethoven. And thank God he did!
kimancuo 11 months ago
A general comment here is that Brahms music needs time to be understood. I couldn't disagree more; Brahms is absolutely transparent; what you hear is what it is, and you can catch it perfectly in just one or two hearings. On the other side, we could have Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Berg or even Wagner. For those you sure need time, but not for Brahms.
By the way, an excellent performance, one of the best I know. Thanks for posting.
javierqatar 11 months ago
@javierqatar Depends on personal experience, I suppose. But I can say that Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Debussy, Stravinsky impacted me immediately and it was because they seemed to have strong imagist qualities. Shostakovich is often criticized as being glorified film music (which in many cases is a fair judgement). Brahms is different, so complex and rich that I had to be patient, had to think in order to understand and love it. Much like the work put into a fulfilling relationship.
maestrojeremy 11 months ago
@maestrojeremy As far as impact is concern, no doubt Shostakovich, Mahler or Prokofiev are far higher than Brahms, a composer that looked back rather than forward... But understanding "modern" composers is much more difficult: melodies are complex, harmonies oftenly disappearing, structure is sometimes intrincate, etc. Brahms work is much more simple. In fact XX and XXI centuries music is made "against" Brahms, never following him. His music died with him, though his quality is out of question.
javierqatar 11 months ago
@javierqatar Actually, that's not true. If you were to try and study Brahms, especially the symphonies, you would find a deep complexity in counterpoint that is still perfectly logical. You simply don't find that with Shostakovich or Prokofiev. As far as XX and XXI century composers going "against" Brahms, that's also false. Read up on Schoenberg and his thoughts concerning Brahms. Score analysis and research can do wonders. I only say this because I think you're missing out on Brahms.
maestrojeremy 11 months ago
@maestrojeremy Don't get me wrong: his 1st symphony is one of the best, his 1st Piano concerto is still my favourite piano concerto... Regarding counterpoint complexity, agreed. But that's all. The era of tonality was reaching an end, and Brahms was still composing "his" music. Whatever Schoenberg said, I find his music has little in common with Brahms. Tannhäuser sounds much more modern than his 4th symphony, and it was composed 50 years earlier! Brahms influence in music history is thus small.
javierqatar 11 months ago
@javierqatar In your terms of modern is more influential (what I interpreted), Tchaikovsky didn't offer much new, if at all, but he did write, arguably, many of the world's most popular melodies. While this isn't Brahms-speke, I wanted to test your logic with another composer. Regardless, the music is divine.
ohquffy 11 months ago
@javierqatar What you hear is what *you* get, maybe. Listen harder and you might hear in Brahms what Schoenberg did. And forget the 1st symphony and 1st piano concerto for a while; those works are obviously grand, but composed when Brahms was still playing the role of second order Beethoven. His real masterpieces were to come later.
By the way, the depth of Brahms is in the intricacy of his motivic development. Absolutely transparent? Like an abyss. Peer deeper!
lexleebold 11 months ago
wonderful performance the audience must have felt privileged, what riches Brahms left us.
thatwilldonicely 1 year ago
wonderful performance, what riches Brahms left us.
thatwilldonicely 1 year ago
Now you know where John Williams got the idea for the theme of "Star Wars;" even the key is the same!
(The "Animal House" theme is also Brahms; his "Academic Festival Overture.")
SatchmoSings 1 year ago 2
Such a beautiful piece. And this is a magnificent performance by Barenboim, and great sound quality too .
trschaefer 1 year ago
@funkyalto fail
89dan98 1 year ago
the entire concerto is one of the most colossal moments in music history!
ueblondon 1 year ago 66
@ueblondon
a concerto is not a musical moment.
but I appreciate your liking of it ...
sokrateskerem 9 months ago
@ueblondon I agree entirely. It is not only my favourite Brahms but also magisterial in its design/composition. Extraordinary and outstanding masterpiece.
aristotle358 3 months ago
hey, is it James Levine at 3:30???
belialah 1 year ago
It works for me............... I love the tempestuous element in the 1st movement I have always been drawn to Gilels interpretation...... but this works
TJFNYC212 1 year ago
The horn solo at the very beginning brings me back so many memories that I nearly cry every time. I listened to this during my sophomore year in high school and those memories really attached to this piece.
odisap 1 year ago
A great conductor conducting another great conductor and pianist!
kimancuo 1 year ago
This dialog between piano and orchestra is wonderful, powerful: 4:40-5:10. You want to live for listening to it.
clamanus 1 year ago
soul food...
captainkoo 1 year ago
And btw, while I adore Barenboim, his stormy character is quite imposed in this interpretation, a more elaborate interpretation would be Rudolf Serkin's, he's less tempered :)
Umslopagas 1 year ago
Brahms' music has always been - with few exceptions in his earlier works - quite subtle, the first time you listen to Brahms' you'll probably feel like listening to a cacophony of sounds, but listen carefully, the main theme is usually played by the most obscure of the instruments, don't let yourself be dragged to follow the wood-winds for too long, the piano and strings alternate bass and treble here, keep with them, they'll set the tone.
Umslopagas 1 year ago 3
@Umslopagas I agree. Brahms is hard to follow at first. I gave up listening to his symphonies twice, but third time I FELL IN LOVE with them. You have to hear the individual melodies carefully.
odisap 1 year ago
@odisap It depends. Brahms' many other compositions, for example his famous violin concerto, are pretty easy to follow.
meowziklvr 1 year ago
you know im not a classical music afacinado. with that said i cant judge the technical aspects of this. i just dont feel this music. is this supposed to be a stormy piece of music? I am asking any1 who knowledgable about classical music or perhaps brahms in general.
raysalsa1 1 year ago
@raysalsa1 Are you asking about the concerto as a whole, or just this first movement. Because as a whole, it represents Brahms coming into the later part of his compositional career whereby his unique exotic european sound is deflty folded into the purity and balance of classical form. So, even in this first movement, it is not supposed to be stormy, or indeed representing anything other than the power of pure music. That was what Brahms was all about (also the reason he was "different"
MrArchimarky 1 year ago
@raysalsa1 when starting with Brahms you will know and "get" his music through repeated listenings. Unlike Mozart and Tchaikovsky which is ear candy and grabs you at first listening, Brahms is soul food and the taste must be acquired. The reward is there. stay with it.
rlabarbe 1 year ago
@rlabarbe 100% true. NO ONE will ever get Brahms at first listening. But 2nd or 3rd and you are hooked for LIFE. It will move you to tears.
odisap 1 year ago
@odisap I find it interesting that we all share the experience with Brahms' music... I just can't get enough of this piece....
darnmat 1 year ago
@raysalsa1 It's supposed to be more, a piece of Art and maturity. The sound is not as showy as it really is considering professional pianists have injured themselves playing this concerto but since this movement is so stretched out people can't really tell. It's not as obvious as the Rachmaninoff Piano concerto no.3. Cuz styles are completely different. In the Rach 3 there r just so many notes. In the Brahms it's really stretchy with large leaps.
cedricrlongreen 1 year ago
I think the part starting at 8 minutes is absolutely breathtaking. And Barenboim must be an ideal interpreter of Brahms.
Piacevole 1 year ago
9:11-9:33 One of the most colossal moments in music history.
1illtown 1 year ago 25
@1illtown Wow. That little section is so powerful. I feel so weak compared to the immense power of this.
odisap 1 year ago
@1illtown i've thumb up your comment but man i heard this on the ABC classic in Australia and i've been looking for this for like ages and when i came to this page i click on that colossal moment and bang it was that same experienced i had on my headphone connected to my mobile. What a moment we all share that many people will never be able to experience.
bizzy00bone 1 year ago
Yes
LoloGalller 1 year ago
@1illtown you make me laugh
JamesraynorII 7 months ago
3:25
qwertypoiu4321 1 year ago
Sorry to disappoint everyone. I think Danny has over-analysed this. I honestly think this is Richter's themesong. I loved the younger Danny playing some of the Beethoven Sonatas - especially to so called "Moonlight Sonata".
SugarTomAppleRoger 1 year ago
It's seems there are 26 people who are right daft!
Brahms is by far, one of the most the most talented composers of his period.
This is a fine example of his un-matched composing capabilities. The depth and passion with which he writes can move even the coldest of hearts to tears.
This concerto truly unlocks the infinite beauty that is a piano.
Not to mention how well it was embodied and preformed by the extraordinary gentle playing.
Utterly amazing...
kuragari318 1 year ago 2
Brahms 2 piano concertos are the best
ueblondon 1 year ago
Comment removed
ueblondon 1 year ago
I am learning this one and watched the NZSO play it - fabulous concerto!
baiba4 1 year ago
Nooo, il maestro baremboim con (tanti) capelli!!!! XD
filopaa1990 1 year ago
8:02 - 9:23 my favorite piano part
planmix 1 year ago
soberbio....nada mas que decir
intelectus1 1 year ago
brahms is one of a handfull, if that many composers who can sustain a large work..where everything flows inevitably ..this work is incomparable . its interesting that to me brahms never gets boring..even schuberts large scale works become ponderous where he joins sections and his developements..where brahms inherited from mozart and beethoven..the rarest gift ..thematic developement..liek bartok said about brahms.."he has inexhaustable inventive powers"
mikejones1770 1 year ago
@mikejones1770 This is an insightful comment... musical greatness is manifest, in my opinion, by what we as listeners come to regard as the ineluctable (or as you note, inevitable) sequence of one note after another. Have you heard Geza Anda perform this work, by the way? With von Karajan in 1968, on DG. I uploaded today. I'd be interested in your thoughts. Thanks.
view_play_list?p=60DB62CB7A7601FF
classicvinylbiz 1 year ago
Like many of Brahms' compositions, there are numerous flashes of brilliance (the part from 8:02 to 9:05 is epic), but there are also numerous sections so boring they put me to sleep.
1980NewWave 1 year ago
@1980NewWave idiot
ulyssesjj 1 year ago
I dunno... i think this dude looks too stern even before he starts. He must have studied in a German conservatory, and you know you can't trust them Germans... even though I have owned 3 German cars. Anyway, I think the piano is the wrong brand for this little ditty. They should just use a 6 foot Kohler I think. Yes, that would do fine. And what's witth the conductor dude's shirt? It's too tight. And the first violinist is not even looking at the spots on the sheet!
gingervytis 1 year ago
Comment removed
1980NewWave 1 year ago
Pity this is the most seen of Brahms 2d interpretations on Youtube. An absolute lack of subtlety on Barenboim's end and too much on Celibidache's. Piano and orchestra could have played their parts in separate rooms... Barenboim getting the deluxe suite, of course.
melitongue 1 year ago
I thought the youngest cellist was extraordinarily cute--is that music appreciation?
caetonad 1 year ago
This is awesome!!!
yossiban 1 year ago
This is very Difficult Piano concerto!
azilor 1 year ago
Magnifico!!!!!!
aneloBannA 1 year ago 4
Jean-Guy from South of France : Celibidache and Barenboim together , the result can only be a fantastic firework ! Congratulation to the artists and to You Tube.
JeanGuyDW 1 year ago
Its not the best reading of the work i have heard (the best interpreter in my opinion is sviatoslav richter)... still it is pretty decent... the tempo feels slightly "lagging" in my opinion although this can be quite subjective...
jonnyenglishlim 1 year ago
@jonnyenglishlim I like the poised tempo, but I'm myself a slow person,so...
annvanmiegem 1 year ago
Hey, this is probably a stupid question, but is Daniel Barenboim the soloist or the conductor of the orchestra here?
My guess would be the soloist, but I wanna make sure.
LOTRzagorath 1 year ago
@LOTRzagorath haha, definitely the pianist, he looks like Billy Joel too
her0esfan 1 year ago
well said bager. Thank You
SuperMANgino 1 year ago
GREAT
davlor86 1 year ago
check out my channel for a MUCH better performance of this concerto :)
bluesyboypete 1 year ago
hey, check out much better performance by Boris Berezovsky on my page. I still need to re-upload the first part of the first movement, cuz youtube screwed it up and it´s only music with one picture without any video... but still... great music to listen to!
bluesyboypete 1 year ago
I love reading the comments of all the musicans...wish I had talent. All I can do is listen and love it all - espically Brahms.
llcamus249 1 year ago
What a beautiful concert!! full of the Brahms' wildly romanticism ... I can't avoid mentioning the best Brahms' 2nd played ever... Moscow, May 31 1968... performer, Claudio Arrau... the concert that made Emil Gilels to cry of emotion, saying after the concert he could't play Brahms' concerts again... I'd like have been there !! :O
Ray0X0 1 year ago
I'm sorry to see all the fuss... This is beautiful music played well. No need to freak-out folks, just enjoy the music for your own sake. At the end of the day, all that matters is what YOU feel inside- not someone else. Musicians should stick together!
capthook1 1 year ago
I love Brahms from now on. Good "discussions" here. I think to settle it all, Brahms is amazing.
final answer.
crazedseahorse 1 year ago 2
THAT'S MUSIC, its beauty is so eternal and perfect that you can't really realize it.
Thank you Brahms, thank you Daniel.
andriventu 1 year ago
Comment removed
fbager 1 year ago 31
that sort of defeats the purpose of the comment box now doesnt it. debate is a good thing. however, being a cellist myself, and having played this piece numerous times with different piansts, see no problems with this interpretation. i like it
mynameismaurice 1 year ago
Yeah sorry, I realise I might have gone a bit far here... I retract my comment.
fbager 1 year ago
@fbager of course you know why they are fighting.... everyone wants to seem to know something about music.... but infact the people that know about music sit back and enjoy music rather than erect a constant debate with others ... i find that just sad and completely unnecessary
maddorox 1 year ago
@fbager
Are you implying that people shouldn't argue?
That is the reason why art is both interesting and beautiful.
The ignorance of some people is a small price to pay, at least in my opinion.
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991 Yes you're absolutely right very well put. Perhaps my earlier comment was an overreaction on my part. Barenboim is the last person I would think to have a dogmatic view about music. I personally love debate and was just annoyed at some of those ignorant comments that have been long buried anyway.
fbager 1 year ago
@fbager Unfortunately, the 'better' the music is to those of us who like this sort of music, the worse it tends to be to those who prefer more modern sorts of music. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the web seems to be made of haters. It's not just music that gets them, look at any tech-related video, and you'll almost certainly see a huge flame war between Mac, Windows, and Linux fanboys.
LOTRzagorath 1 year ago
If people want to say their opinion on something,I think they should. We just have to learn,that we don't have to judge each others thoughts. Then there will be no fights etc.
malonu157 1 year ago
@fbager If people want to say their opinion on something,I think they should. We just have to learn,that we don't have to judge each others thoughts. Then there will be no fights etc.
malonu157 1 year ago
This is one of the most monumental of piano concertos. I remember attending a concert at the now extinct Lewisohn Stadium in NYC. I was expecting to hear the Brahms first piano concerto and instead heard the second played by Moura Lympany. At first I was disappointed. But then I was glad. Brahms spent a good deal of time perfecting his compositions until he was finally satisfied.
FERENCEFF 1 year ago
Comment removed
intelectus1 1 year ago
lol thank u 4 that...i lov this piece..but the ending of the rondo in the 1st movment was still my favorite endings of all
tmes!!
CorelliChopin08 1 year ago
lol
funkyalto 1 year ago
Well, Barenboim does as much as one can do with this piece. I've never liked Brahms, but Barenboim keeps your attention throughout the piece, and prevents it from becoming boring.
KhagarBalugrak 2 years ago
if u think brahms is boring then you are an utter fool
funkyalto 2 years ago
Comment removed
KhagarBalugrak 2 years ago
You're foolish for thinking, apparently, that not a single piece Brahms wrote was boring. All composers have their bad days, and this piece, I'm sad to say, was one of Brahms's bad days.
KhagarBalugrak 2 years ago
you said brahms was boring not his pieces, and if you think this piece is boring you have no appreciation for art. go back to your style of music coz we dont wanna hear you insult one of the greatest composers in history. no one hear cares about your opinion so dont try to convince them that brahms was boring, your just a trolling random with nothing better to do then insult people that few, including you, cant even compare to.
and im proud to think brahms is never boring coz i appreciate him.
funkyalto 2 years ago
Interesting. Have you told any of this to Mr Istomin? How did he take it?
ghettowizard 1 year ago
No, I didn't...and he wouldn't have taken it well. I admit it.
To be fair, Brahms was incredible at the TECHNICAL aspects of composition - the musical architecture of his pieces is pretty much beyond compare. However, most of his pieces fail to communicate anything on the level of the mind or emotions...with the very clear exception of his later works, some of which are just incredibly moving.
In short, I only find Brahms's later works to be worthwhile.
KhagarBalugrak 1 year ago
Well... To each their own, obviously. But the loss here is all yours.
I remember some years ago playing his op.25 and op.60 and then I had to replace Akiko Suwanai in the Tchaikovsky Trio in the second half. I absolutely adore Tchaikovsky in general and that piece in particular, but after the quartets it just felt like cabaret music.
ghettowizard 1 year ago
It's the same for me.
chiappealvento 1 year ago
The ignorance of your comment on Brahms is crass. "Musical architectre of his pieces is pretty much beyond compare, however most of his pieces fail to communicate anything on the level of mind or emotions" ?!? What empty non-sense, dressed in pretense of big words. I wonder if Brahms himself is rolling in his grave...
theViolinDreamer 1 year ago
Or maybe you're insensitive and mistake technical proficiency in the art of composition for actual expression and communication. Maybe the "moving" quality if this piece is entirely a figment of your imagination.
KhagarBalugrak 1 year ago
@KhagarBalugrak
Sorry. Not buying it. Again: big words, no sense.
If you would be 1/2 of what you say you are, you would know that technique and "expression" go hand in hand, whether in composition or the playing of an instrument. "Expressivity" and "emotionality" are subjective terms that denote one's capacity to coordinate his artistic resources towards an overall end, creating effective musical statements in the process.
theViolinDreamer 1 year ago
@KhagarBalugrak In fact , only great technical abillity (aka skill of coordination and synthesis at high speed and intense focus) can produce high expressivity.
Your statement, that Bramhs uses a great musical architecture but doesn't touch the "mind or emotions" is LITTLE specific and HIGHLY subjective. You could use it as a personal thought at the best, but in no way as an opinion of authority.
theViolinDreamer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KhagarBalugrak In fact , only great technical abillity (aka skill of coordination and synthesis at high speed and intense focus) can produce high expressivity.
Your statement, that Bramhs uses a great musical architecture but doesn't touch the "mind or emotions" is LITTLE specific and HIGHLY subjective. You could use it as a personal thought at the best, but in no way as an opinion of authority.
theViolinDreamer 1 year ago
@KhagarBalugrak In fact , only great technical abillity (aka skill of coordination and synthesis at high speed and intense focus) can produce high expressivity.
Your statement, that Bramhs uses a great musical architecture but doesn't touch the "mind or emotions" is LITTLE specific and HIGHLY subjective.
theViolinDreamer 1 year ago
@theViolinDreamer, music isn't subjective. It's objective. Our experience of it is subjective, but music as an external, real thing does exist. Either any give moment in a piece is powerfully expressive, or it isn't, or perhaps it's somewhere in between. And of course this is heavily modified by the performer(s) themselves. But in the end, whatever is played has a certain objective amount of expressiveness. We may never be totally accurate in our perceptions, but we must try.
KhagarBalugrak 1 year ago
@KhagarBalugrak
I do agree with most of your arguments about musicality and technique.
But expressiveness is not objective, it is a word with a constantly varying terminology.
Maybe the word that would fit better with your description, would be expressiveness according to what the composer wants: style. This is much more objective. You can hear when people put their emotions in a higher priority than the composers.
I do not see that as negative, but I think it is disrespecting the composer.
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991
Projecting yourself over a creation of a different human being and fooling yourself that it is your own.
I myself am a pianist, and it is still really hard for me to try and be objective with pieces I relate to intensely.
I think that if I play it my own way and it still sounds good its fine, but I prefer to write my own pieces for that matter.
Being expressive, the way you mentioned it, has nothing to do more than engaging emotionally.
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991
There is no way that you can tell if someone is expressive, if you don't use an MRI scan, maybe even that won't produce an definite result. It doesn't matter. What matters is aesthetics.
A term that's more objective is being musical. You can be expressive and not musical. Being musical is a blend of the composer's indications(the objective part) and your own interpretation along those lines (the somewhat subjective part).
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991
Think about it though, trying to subtract universal statements out of aesthetics is vane, especially when the composer never indicated that he created conceptual art (I think and I hope that great composes like Brahms created pieces first for beauty and then logic.
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991 Music socially was always an escape from the absurdity of real life, if you take that away what remains is nothing of real significance).
Music is like a drug: if you feel a certain way that makes you happy, why would you reflect on this experience. Why mix anthropocentric concepts that do not apply to everything into beauty?
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991
Fuck that...
Glenn Gould is not musical, but I love him.
Dream Theater are not musical nor as expressive(probably), but I like them.
Kapustin is not a musical composer most of the times, I still like him.
Lady Gaga is an attention-seeking artist of no particular musical originality, but I enjoy her melodies, they create certain emotions I can relate to strongly.
Fuck interpreting and just listen.
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991, expressiveness must be objective and located in the external world if it is to have any reality at all. There MUST be truth about various pieces and whether or not they are expressive or not, just like there is objective truth about, for example, whether someone was angry or not at any given moment, or joyful, etc. That's why debate, analysis and investigation of pieces is so important - it helps uncover the truth that would otherwise remain hidden from us.
KhagarBalugrak 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991, it's true that all of us project emotions onto certain composers, which makes it difficult to be objective and honest in our evaluations. That does not mean, however, that objectivity and truth are impossible to achieve, or that truth is nothing but our thoughts and fantasies, and therefore doesn't really exist. Truth DOES exist; it must, because the pieces we listen to are creations in their own right; they aren't merely our mental projections.
KhagarBalugrak 1 year ago
@KhagarBalugrak
First of all because I know where this is going I should state that I am not religious, and that I am 99% sure that there is no metaphysical truth of any kind, and even if there is it is not transcendental, it is just different (another dimension or something).
Nevertheless I leave this 0.000001% that anything that I can't prove completely wrong (like that all existence is not real besides my own) might be true, or plausible.
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991 If you ever read Carl Popper his viewpoint in this matter is that "you can only prove something wrong". Which although it is spelled in a paradoxical way, bears great importance. It means that all absolutes are paradoxes.
You saying "Truth does exist" is circular logic therefor a logical fallacy.
You do not need to justify existence, at least existentially. Even if you are dreaming this is an alternative reality.
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991
Are you guilty that when you are in a strong REM sleep you are not conscious of reality? No, because what matters is what you feel. Aesthetics. I am sad that there is no unifying theory in physics or philosophy, and of course religion. I would kill myself if I had the guts, but then I think to myself that direct emotions are much more real and material than thoughts. That's when I go back to ignorance (conscious ignorance) like Sisyphus.
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@shinobi1311991
After I analyze a musical piece I try to listen to it as if I ve never analyzed it before, because it is of much more instinctual and psychological value
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@theViolinDreamer, technical skill and musical skill are related, but not the same. The ability to decide whether something is right or not is inborn and intuitive. You can train in music theory all you want, but in the end, one's ability to make musical decisions is something you can't teach.
Furthermore, technical skill and expressivity are related, but they are different levels of music. It IS POSSIBLE to have great technique but no expression in one's playing. I've heard it many times.
KhagarBalugrak 1 year ago
Comment removed
shinobi1311991 1 year ago
@theViolinDreamer, therefore, it is also possible to be wonderful at, say, orchestration, rhythm, etc. and still communicate nothing in a composition. And sadly, this piece is just such a piece, as far as I can tell. It feels like musical bloviating...it says nothing, despite its grand architecture and all the rest of it.
KhagarBalugrak 1 year ago
@theViolinDreamer
What exactly is ignorant about KhagarBulagrak words? The way he feels many music lovers have felt throughout the past 150 years, starting with Richard Wagner, Anton Bruckner, Peter Tchaikovsky or Hugo Wolf.
Brahms has always been a composer whose technical excellence and intellectual honesty are beyond dispute, but who does not appeal to all musical minds alike (as, say, Bach, Mozart or Beethoven do).
herodot2 1 year ago
@KhagarBalugrak I also thought that also, until I played cello for the first time in a Brahms symphony (No. 1). As we worked through the 2nd movement, through which I always slept through, in recording or in concerto, I realized how great a composer he truly was. The 4th movement was even more amazing. He's really NOT boring if you really get to know him, not just listen casually. For the latter Rachmaninoff, Tchaikovsky and Mozart would be better.
dga471 1 year ago
im deluded for thinking for thinking its interesting?
you know why Brahms hasnt and will never be forgotten? coz he is interesting, in fact his music was near revolutionary
it doesn't matter what you think coz it doesn't mean anything, Brahms lives forever, you mean nothing to anybody
and neither does your unappreciative, unmusical opinion
you are no musician enjoy your empty life
funkyalto 2 years ago
Comment removed
KhagarBalugrak 2 years ago