Your Top Violin Concertos!

[karlhenning]

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.

I haven't heard Mutter in this, but it's certainly a fun piece.

[BachQ]

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.

Would Zigeunerweisen NOT rank in your top 10 if performed by someone other than Mutter?

[karlhenning]

How absolute the knave is!

[Bunny]

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.

Steve doesn't enjoy Mozart's and Bach's violin concertos, and has admitted it.  He shouldn't have to play them again and afaic, he shouldn't have to ever listen to them again.  Similarly, no one should have to listen to him playing them either.  An actor who thinks Hamlet or all of Shakespeare boring shouldn't have to play Shakespeare and we shouldn't have to see him doing it.  I don't expect everyone to like everything, but disliking Shakespeare or a Mozart violin concerto doesn't mean that the works are not first rate, which was the sense I got from Steve's remarks.  He doesn't care for the violin concertos because they aren't good enough to interest him.  Mozart wasn't mature enough when he wrote them, wasn't skilled enough at orchestration when he composed them, etc.  The work is at fault, not his sensibilities.  That attitude I do object to because he then goes on to say that Bach's violin concertos are similarly unmoving because the violin hadn't evolved enough as a solo instrument to enable anyone to produce a great violin concerto.  He can't blame Bach's immaturity, so here he blames history.  Again, it's not his sensibilities at fault, but the music which is lacking.

What a bizzare statement.

Sarge

Not bizarre, honest.  She works so hard to find anything new and novel in the music that it's very clear that she's bored with the repertory.  They say that Mozart's piano sonatas are the easiest and the hardest pieces to play.  They are easy because they don't make heavy demands on technique.  They are difficult because when you play them you really have to like the music and approach it as if you had never heard it before.  The music has to flow as easily as water flowing downstream; the artist has to surrender to the notes Mozart has put on the page, without vanity, and just go where ever it takes her.  That's much more difficult.  Mutter is no longer content to merely play that music with joy and she's too much of a professional to just go through the motions.  So she over analyzes and examines every note under a microscope to find something new.  When the music doesn't yield what she wants, then she examines every nuance of her performance and starts playing with dynamics, rubatos, vibrato, or absence of vibrato, all to make it seem fresh to herself.  Nothing in the world can stand up to such scrutiny, not even Beethoven and Mozart.  When she plays different repertory she becomes a different violinist, much more natural and less analytical, as in that Zigeunerweisen or the Berg Violin Concerto.  She doesn't have to analyze this because she feels it, and she enables me to feel it too, on a deep, visceral level. 

[Larry Rinkel]

What a bizzare statement.

Sarge

If you had suffered through Mutter's disastrous performance of the Beethoven concerto at Masur's last NY Phil concert in 2004 or so, you would have thrown up your hands in despair and cried, "Onkel!"

[Larry Rinkel]

Steve doesn't enjoy Mozart's and Bach's violin concertos, and has admitted it.  He shouldn't have to play them again and afaic, he shouldn't have to ever listen to them again.  Similarly, no one should have to listen to him playing them either.  An actor who thinks Hamlet or all of Shakespeare boring shouldn't have to play Shakespeare and we shouldn't have to see him doing it.  I don't expect everyone to like everything, but disliking Shakespeare or a Mozart violin concerto doesn't mean that the works are not first rate, which was the sense I got from Steve's remarks.  He doesn't care for the violin concertos because they aren't good enough to interest him.  Mozart wasn't mature enough when he wrote them, wasn't skilled enough at orchestration when he composed them, etc.  The work is at fault, not his sensibilities.  That attitude I do object to because he then goes on to say that Bach's violin concertos are similarly unmoving because the violin hadn't evolved enough as a solo instrument to enable anyone to produce a great violin concerto.  He can't blame Bach's immaturity, so here he blames history.  Again, it's not his sensibilities at fault, but the music which is lacking.

Oh, I don't know. I don't find Mozart's violin concertos as remarkable as his later violin sonatas, not to mention quite a few of the piano concertos starting from K 271. They're nice, appealing pieces, but they don't astonish me the way the later works do. On the other hand, at least the slow movement of the Bach double is just extraordinary in my opinion, and I'm sure many others' opinions. (Balanchine must have agreed when he used this music for one of his most celebrated ballets.)

[Steve]

"Steve doesn't enjoy Mozart's and Bach's violin concertos, and has admitted it." ,

Strawman.  I never said that I didn't enjoy them, just that I didn't find them profoundly moving. The contain beautiful melodies, just like Mozart's early symphonies, but they've never connected with me a deeper level.

"he shouldn't have to ever listen to them again."

I'll decide what I listen to, thanks.  

"Similarly, no one should have to listen to him playing them either."

That's why I generally don't perform them.

"a Mozart violin concerto doesn't mean that the works are not first rate"

Read the title of this thread, please. It reads, "Your Top Violin Concertos'. I enjoy the Mozart Concertos, but I don't consider them to be 'first rate' works. That's a valid opinion, just as yours is.

"That attitude I do object to because he then goes on to say that Bach's violin concertos are similarly unmoving because the violin hadn't evolved enough as a solo instrument to enable anyone to produce a great violin concerto.  He can't blame Bach's immaturity, so here he blames history.  Again, it's not his sensibilities at fault, but the music which is lacking."

That's just a complete misrepresentation of my position. It's not a matter of immature sensibilities, its one of skill. He was a much more skilled and versed composer when he wrote his 41st Symphony then when he wrote his violin concertos.

[Bunny]

"Steve doesn't enjoy Mozart's and Bach's violin concertos, and has admitted it." ,

Strawman.  I never said that I didn't enjoy them, just that I didn't find them profoundly moving. The contain beautiful melodies, just like Mozart's early symphonies, but they've never connected with me a deeper level.

"he shouldn't have to ever listen to them again."

I'll decide what I listen to, thanks. 

"Similarly, no one should have to listen to him playing them either."

That's why I generally don't perform them.

"a Mozart violin concerto doesn't mean that the works are not first rate"

Read the title of this thread, please. It reads, "Your Top Violin Concertos'. I enjoy the Mozart Concertos, but I don't consider them to be 'first rate' works. That's a valid opinion, just as yours is.

"That attitude I do object to because he then goes on to say that Bach's violin concertos are similarly unmoving because the violin hadn't evolved enough as a solo instrument to enable anyone to produce a great violin concerto.  He can't blame Bach's immaturity, so here he blames history.  Again, it's not his sensibilities at fault, but the music which is lacking."

That's just a complete misrepresentation of my position. It's not a matter of immature sensibilities, its one of skill. He was a much more skilled and versed composer when he wrote his 41st Symphony then when he wrote his violin concertos.

Steve, what about the Bach?  The violin part isn't sufficiently interesting because...?  Clearly you can't say that Bach lacked the mature skill set to create great music when he composed those.  They don't work for you either on the deepest level, but that's not Bach's fault, that's just an accident of history or violin evolution? 

You don't feel the Mozart is a mature work so it's less interesting to you.  Fine.  I think that by the time Mozart had written the later violin concertos his abilities were equal to any more mature artist.  Did Mozart continue to improve as he got older?  Undoubtedly he did, and his mature works reflect the fact that he continued to evolve as an artist and composer.  Does that take anything away from his earlier works?  Not in my opinion.  When you start out at such a high level and go higher, it doesn't mean that the earlier works should be disdained.  I don't hate Picasso's blue period because he hadn't yet matured into the artist of the Guernica. I don't find Michelangelo's Drunken Bacchus or Madonna of the Stairs less interesting because he hadn't the same skill level as when he sculpted the Pietá.  For me it just doesn't work that way.  But, you are as entitled to like or dislike what you wish.  Just don't try to convince me that the only reason you don't care for the violin concertos is because Mozart wasn't as good an orchestrator or had less developed composing skills when he was younger than when he was in his 30s, so therefore earlier works lack quality.  The truth is what you have already stated, that these works don't move you the way other works do. And excuse me for not realizing that when you say that music doesn't move you still enjoy it.  If music doesn't move me, it might as well be muzak -- just a lot of pleasant background noise not to be savored for it's artistic merit. 

For some reason, Mozart's violin concertos haven't clicked with you, and you are entitled to that. It doesn't make you less intelligent or less of a musician, or less of a person.  Just don't try to explain it by saying it's Mozart's fault because he didn't have the requisite skill set to impress you yet.  Just say that early Mozart isn't your cup of tea.  No need to elaborate and dig yourself into such a deep hole. 

[Valentino]

I do prefer the young ASM in Mozart and Beethoven to the mature one, I admit.

I forgot to mention the two true JS Bach concertos earlier. Beautiful music.

[Steve]

I am not trying to convince you that Mozart's Violin Concertos are not works of great caliber. We have numerous discussions on the merits of composers and their works, but this thread is reserved for our favorites. I've never really been inspired by these concerti, in the manner of his later works. You presume to know why it is that I don't like Violin Concertos, and are telling me that it differs from what I've said. I don't find these works to be examples of excellent orchestration, in the way that the concertos of Shostakovich, Prokokiev, Brahms, Beethoven, and Mendelssohn are, to name a few. There isn't the same level of depth. I've postulated that this might have been do to the role of the during the time of Mozart, or his relative age at the time. Those claims lack verifiability of any kind, so they remain conjecture.

"And excuse me for not realizing that when you say that music doesn't move you still enjoy it."

It's a matter of degrees of enjoyment. Since you are so fond of these literary/artistic analogies, allow me to provide one of my own. I've read the Harry Potter Series, from the very first volume. They've provided me with some light entertainment, and I can say that I enjoy reading them. Yet, this experience does not challenge my faculties in the way that my current reading of Proust does. Reading Proust has changed the way I interact with the world, as well as provided me with insights on the very nature of life itself.

I enjoy Mahler's 9th as well as Mozart's Violin Concertos. I am telling you that the latter has never profoundly affected me as a musician. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy its beautiful melodies.

"No need to elaborate and dig yourself into such a deep hole. "

Stop telling me what I should/not do!   

Your last post:

"He shouldn't have to play them again and afaic, he shouldn't have to ever listen to them again.  "

"Similarly, no one should have to listen to him playing them either."

[Solitary Wanderer]

I love the Sibelius Violin Concerto.

Heard it performed last year with the NZSO and Vadim Repin. Stunning stuff

[Israfel the Black]

Steve doesn't enjoy Mozart's and Bach's violin concertos, and has admitted it.  He shouldn't have to play them again and afaic, he shouldn't have to ever listen to them again.  Similarly, no one should have to listen to him playing them either.  An actor who thinks Hamlet or all of Shakespeare boring shouldn't have to play Shakespeare and we shouldn't have to see him doing it.  I don't expect everyone to like everything, but disliking Shakespeare or a Mozart violin concerto doesn't mean that the works are not first rate, which was the sense I got from Steve's remarks.  He doesn't care for the violin concertos because they aren't good enough to interest him.  Mozart wasn't mature enough when he wrote them, wasn't skilled enough at orchestration when he composed them, etc.  The work is at fault, not his sensibilities.  That attitude I do object to because he then goes on to say that Bach's violin concertos are similarly unmoving because the violin hadn't evolved enough as a solo instrument to enable anyone to produce a great violin concerto.  He can't blame Bach's immaturity, so here he blames history.  Again, it's not his sensibilities at fault, but the music which is lacking.

It seems you are being a bit of an extremist. There's absolutely no reason why Steve should consider Mozart's Violin Concertos first rate works if he doesn't enjoy them as much as Romantic concertos. It seems to me you are greatly wasting your time in trying to catch him in some sort of circular logic. The argument I had with him was to justify that Mozart's Violin Concertos were written when Mozart was a master composer, and to not favor them is merely a preference of style, which he seems to agree with to some degree. It's mere taste. There is no reason to try and force someone to consider a work top tier if they don't enjoy it as much as others.

[Israfel the Black]

Would Zigeunerweisen NOT rank in your top 10 if performed by someone other than Mutter?

Hmmm... yes, I see. The Mutter recording is pretty much it for me, so maybe not. Good point.

[S709]

The Rosenfeld is recorded on a "Hastedt" CD, which can be found at www.jpc.de (or some others sources). There exists another CD with the same recording (if I am not wrong) on a label, which I can recall now. This CD contains the Rosenfeld VC1 and Khachaturian piano concerto. An internet search will bring this recording up.

The Ifukube VC1 and 2 are released on the Japanese Fontec label and are out of print (and Fontec is only distributed by Japanese companies). Maybe sometimes a copy will come up on ebay. But there exists a second recording - again on a label which I cannot recall right now. But this is a 2-CD-set containing both Ifukube VCs and some other composers works. You surely can find this recording at www.hmv.co.jp or other Japanese online shops.

Thanks a lot !! Very useful info.

[PSmith08]

1. Ligeti, "Concerto for Violin and Orchestra" - A great listen that demands a lot and gives as much back.
2. Beethoven, op. 61 - Little else needs to be said.
3. Bach, BWV 1042 (E minor concerto) - As wonderful as anything you'd want to hear, which can be said generally of Bach.

[karlhenning]

2. Beethoven, op. 61 - Little else needs to be said.

Unless it be: With the Schnittke cadenze, right?  

[PSmith08]

Unless it be: With the Schnittke cadenze, right?  

Them's fightin' words 'round about my parts. If it was good enough for Fritz Kreisler, it's good enough for us. You best get back to Russia where they like that Schnittke stuff. 

Seriously, though, I've never cared much for the cadenza debate: Schnittke or Kreisler, both are fine by my book.

[Steve]

Unless it be: With the Schnittke cadenze, right?  

Indeed. 

[Steve]

I haven't heard Mutter in this, but it's certainly a fun piece.

Neither have I. From the look of a few of these posts, we're surely missing out on a grand time, Karl 

[Rabin_Fan]

3. Bach, BWV 1042 (E minor concerto) - As wonderful as anything you'd want to hear, which can be said generally of Bach.

This is in E major, not E minor.