Your Top Violin Concertos!

[71 dB]

I see you haven't down your homework, 71 dB. That's pretty sloppy behavior. 

With maturity, Mozart's music becomes increasingly rich in counterpoint, often to the point of saturation. By contrast, there's very little use of contrapuntal texture in his early music, and the few examples of fugal writing from this period are quite clumsy.

I didn't know that being a 'free thinker' implied ignorance and the spreading of misinformations.

I have done my homework. I listened all Mozart last years when I bought the brilliant classics boxset. I found early Mozart have more counterpoint than late Mozart.

[Josquin des Prez]

I have done my homework. I listened all Mozart last years when I bought the brilliant classics boxset. I found early Mozart have more counterpoint than late Mozart.

Then there's obviously something quite wrong with either your understanding of counterpoint or your ears. Which one is it?

[71 dB]

Then there's obviously something quite wrong with either your understanding of counterpoint or your ears. Which one is it?

Well, Mozart has a lot counterpoint in his late works but he also clearly avoids it. It's hard to say whether he has more or less but he avoids counterpoint on late works. His early works sound baroque. Baroque was about counterpoint, classism isn't. All knows that.

Anyway you disagree with me in about everything and frankly I don't care what you think.

[Bunny]

Correction: I don't consider the Bach concerti to be exceptions. They are beautiful pieces, but I haven't been really affected by them in any profound way. So, back to the absolute.

I have never been significantly moved by a pre-Romantic violin concerto. That's not disputable.

None deserving mention on this thread.

This thread is about our 'Top Violin Concertos'. I wouldn't nominate any pre-Romantic works for that distinction.

Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, Prokokiev, Elgar, Sibelius....

Clearly you aren't discussing the music but merely your visceral reactions to the music.  I must agree absolutely that you are incapable of being moved by Bach and Mozart.  Your loss.

[karlhenning]

I must agree absolutely that you are incapable of being moved by Bach and Mozart.  Your loss.

No, there you are out of your text.  You have no business imputing "incapacity" to Steve.

Clearly you aren't discussing Steve's reception of the music but merely your visceral reactions to Steve's reception of the music 

[karlhenning]

Anyway you disagree with me in about everything and frankly I don't care what you think.

Anyway, your discussion of Mozart is typical of your eccentric Junk Musicology, and there's frankly no reason anyone else should care what you think.

[Steve]

Clearly you aren't discussing the music but merely your visceral reactions to the music.  I must agree absolutely that you are incapable of being moved by Bach and Mozart.  Your loss.

The music of Mozart and Bach.... No, I was only referring to their Violin Concertos. St. Matthew's Passion, The Cantatas, Brandenberg Concertos, Late Mozart Symphonies, Don Giovanni, Mass in C... I could go on for days. 

"visceral reactions to the music"

What a silly, and utterly indefensible claim. I've played these concertos! 

[Scriptavolant]

Pre-romantic violin concertos shouldn't be listened to by comparing them with what came next. To enjoy a Mozart's symphony you don't need to read it under the lens of Beethoven's or Mahler's symphonies. I strongly disagree with the point that music moves toward greatness; an historical contextualization of what you listen to is much more suitable than considering, say, classicism only as a mere preparation for what came next.
And how about the statement that violin concertos in the pre-romantic period were taken into smaller account; I don't agree. Same thing could be said for a lot of other forms. They were simply taken in a different account, not necessarily better or worse per-sé; they're better or worse in the context of your personal inclination, which is a different story.

[Israfel the Black]

Yes, it is true that all musical progression moves toward greatness, but you must take into account the development of the composer's skills into orchestration. Mozart's Violin Concertos were written at a time when his powers of composition were not yet fully developed. The cantatas of Bach could be considered the finest example of musicianship in that genre (as could the Brandenberg Concerti), but Mozart's Violin Concertos were written long before the violin acquired virtuoso status and it received due attention.

You misread my post. I never said all musical progression moves toward greatness. The progressive is great, yes, but this does not mean what he progressed into is a superior form of composition. It's merely the fact that he was a progressive that makes the composer great. You are also still referring to a different form of concerto. It is clear you have a great affinity for the Romantic concerto. It probably exemplifies the genre for you due to the showpiece nature of the cadenza and the lush Romantic themes. Although Mozart's Violin Concertos do not use this sort of extravagance, it still requires considerable virtuosity and contains excellent cadenza passages for the Violin. This style of composing was not completely done away with, Beethoven marked the beginning of the showpiece complexity to be followed by Paganini and Liszt, yet Schumann's Violin Concerto (and Piano Concerto for that matter) is more in the style of a Mozart concerto, and is one of the most beautiful written. Elgar's Cello Concerto, one of the greatest written, also is composed in this fashion. Similarly, Brahms' First Piano Concerto utilizes a similar logic in its construction, where the accompaniment and the soloist work in an agreeable exchange. It's grander, more ambitious, and a larger work, but its still a very classical concerto in its design and no less great. Mozart progressed in style and he developed new orchestration skills, but once again, he was a master when he wrote his Violin Concertos, and I doubt he would have changed a note in them 8 years later. They merely reflect a different style of composition and the spirit of a younger composer.

Pre-romantic violin concertos shouldn't be listened to by comparing them with what came next. To enjoy a Mozart's symphony you don't need to read it under the lens of Beethoven's or Mahler's symphonies. I strongly disagree with the point that music moves toward greatness; an historical contextualization of what you listen to is much more suitable than considering, say, classicism only as a mere preparation for what came next.
And how about the statement that violin concertos in the pre-romantic period were taken into smaller account; I don't agree. Same thing could be said for a lot of other forms. They were simply taken in a different account, not necessarily better or worse per-sé; they're better or worse in the context of your personal inclination, which is a different story.

Precisely!

[Steve]

You misread my post. I never said all musical progression moves toward greatness. The progressive is great, yes, but this does not mean what he progressed into is a superior form of composition. It's merely the fact that he was a progressive that makes the composer great. You are also still referring to a different form of concerto. It is clear you have a great affinity for the Romantic concerto. It probably exemplifies the genre for you due to the showpiece nature of the cadenza and the lush Romantic themes. Although Mozart's Violin Concertos do not use this sort of extravagance, it still requires considerable virtuosity and contains excellent cadenza passages for the Violin. This style of composing was not completely done away with, Beethoven marked the beginning of the showpiece complexity to be followed by Paganini and Liszt, yet Schumann's Violin Concerto (and Piano Concerto for that matter) is more in the style of a Mozart concerto, and is one of the most beautiful written. Elgar's Cello Concerto, one of the greatest written, also is composed in this fashion. Similarly, Brahms' First Piano Concerto utilizes a similar logic in its construction, where the accompaniment and the soloist work in an agreeable exchange. It's grander, more ambitious, and a larger work, but its still a very classical concerto in its design and no less great. Mozart progressed in style and he developed new orchestration skills, but once again, he was a master when he wrote his Violin Concertos, and I doubt he would have changed a note in them 8 years later. They merely reflect a different style of composition and the spirit of a younger composer.

Precisely!

If you read the sentence of my post, you'll see that there is a pretty obvious error.  it is meant to read "not all musical progession". Otherwise, I agree with your post.

[Israfel the Black]

If you read the sentence of my post, you'll see that there is a pretty obvious error.  it is meant to read "not all musical progession". Otherwise, I agree with your post.

Ah, I see the edit now. I still think my post addresses the rest of your post.

[Bunny]

The music of Mozart and Bach.... No, I was only referring to their Violin Concertos. St. Matthew's Passion, The Cantatas, Brandenberg Concertos, Late Mozart Symphonies, Don Giovanni, Mass in C... I could go on for days. 

"visceral reactions to the music"

What a silly, and utterly indefensible claim. I've played these concertos! 

Yes, but the music hasn't moved you.  That's the real pity.  A musician who admits that he doesn't feel moved by the music he plays? What would you say to the actor who has played Hamlet but finds him a boring fellow?  Sometimes listening to AS Mutter playing Mozart and Beethoven I wonder when she became bored by their music as well. 

[Steve]

Yes, but the music hasn't moved you.  That's the real pity.  A musician who admits that he doesn't feel moved by the music he plays? What would you say to the actor who has played Hamlet but finds him a boring fellow?  Sometimes listening to AS Mutter playing Mozart and Beethoven I wonder when she became bored by their music as well. 

This is really a matter of subjective experience. As a musician, I respond quite differently to each piece that I perform. While some, such as Mutter, may be profoundly affected by these concertos, I am not. These concertos do not speak to me as many others that I play. I was going over a Saint-Saens's 3rd Violin Concerto this morning and I was just struck by how completely it had taken hold of me. I love Baroque and High-Classical music, but I've just never been overly fond of these concertos.

What would I say to that actor? Having personally played the lead in a production of Hamlet, I would be dumbfounded. But, If the character failed to resonate with him, I wouldn't assume that his opinion on the matter wasn't thoughtful. I will restate, for perhaps the third time, that I have plenty of experience with these concerti. I've studied their scores, heard countless renditions, and even attended a couple of lectures. They simply do not move me in the way that other pieces have. They don't come up in my recitals and I rarely practice them at home. Look over the pages of this thread. How many put the Mozart Violin Concertos on their list?

Are we all incapable of appreciating them, then?

[Israfel the Black]

Yes, but the music hasn't moved you.  That's the real pity.  A musician who admits that he doesn't feel moved by the music he plays? What would you say to the actor who has played Hamlet but finds him a boring fellow?  Sometimes listening to AS Mutter playing Mozart and Beethoven I wonder when she became bored by their music as well. 

There are many who favor MacBeth to Hamlet. I've heard some who find Hamlet too ambiguous morally, and they believe Hamlet to be truly too mad for them to relate to the character. It's not a pity he doesn't enjoy Mozart's Violin Concertos, although it would be a pity if he didn't enjoy Mozart at all. In the same way it would be a pity if an actor didn't enjoy Shakespeare at all. You really can't tell someone what to like, nor expect everyone to appreciate the same things you do.

[JoshLilly]

· Anyone here heard José White Lafitte's Violin Concerto in F-sharp minor? The one found on the Rachel Barton CD? I'd like to toss that into the mix as possibly my #1. I've been obsessed with that ever since I first listened to it.
· Carl Reinecke's in G minor, Op.141. This is the best work I've heard by him, even over his Piano Concerto #3 in my opinion.
· Paganini's 1-3!

[Larry Rinkel]

It would seem that so long as a violin concerto exists, then it is on someone's list of Top Ten.

[BachQ]

I've always had a special fondness for violin concerti which no longer exist .......

[karlhenning]

The Island of Extinct Violin Concerti

[Israfel the Black]

What does everyone here think of Pablo Sarasate's Zigeunerweisen for Violin and orchestra as performed by Anne-Sophie Mutter? Has anyone heard it? I think it ranks among my top 10 Concertos.

[Sergeant Rock]

Sometimes listening to AS Mutter playing Mozart and Beethoven I wonder when she became bored by their music as well. 

What a bizzare statement.

Sarge