Tchaikovsky

[kishnevi]

You can aid intelligent discussion of the matter by telling us three or so specific melodies of Tchaikovsky's which are "saccharine."

We can then determine whether this is some trait which inheres to the notes, or if it be a matter of intemperate interpretation.

I'll leave Josquin to stew his own juices....
But I went for most of my life thinking of Tchaikovsky as overly saccharine, especially the symphonies.  I would joke that some of his symphonies might induce diabetic comas. 
Then I got this, more or less on a whim.   Gustavito made me realize I has simply been listening to saccharine interpretations, not saccharine music:
[asin]B001MJ3LZE[/asin]
although previous to that, I always thoroughly enjoyed this one (this is the cover I have), in which the Allergro con fuoco is played fuocissimo
[asin]B0000041Z0[/asin]

But it is obviously easy to think of much of Tchaikovsky's output as sugary, if most of your experience of it is at the hands of the saccharine school of conducting.

And Modest stated after his brother's death that the composer told him that the Sixth was the symphony in which he finally figured out how to compose a symphony (or words to that effect).

[starrynight]

I'm not sure you can say Tchaikovsky's orchestral music, arguably the strongest part of his work and what his reputation is based on, is saccharine.  Other areas like the chamber music might be more open to criticism but that wouldn't be different to many other composers of his time in that area perhaps.

[Josquin des Prez]

Wasn't the reverse also true? Brahms also criticised Rubinstein for a lack of "care" taken over his music, and yet still admired the music as far as I can tell. The fact that he preferred Rubinstein to Tchaikovsky does not speak perfectly to his judgement.

A while back I heard a recital of a Tchaikovsky quartet performed after ones by Haydn and Schubert. It was startling how different the work sounded to what came before - clumsy in comparison. But the closer I concentrated, I found myself unable to work out exactly why I felt this on a technical level. I could not discern any flaws in how the music unfolded, it just seemed to be operating with different goals in mind. Tchaikovsky's criticised "transition problems" in this case were contrary to my expectations, but not neccessarily any worse in the end.

Precisely my reaction to his music. I think what Tchaikovsky tried to do is use a mere sequencing of melodic material as a substitute for actual formal development. This is why i argued that he was "all inspiration", because that's precisely what his music is.

[Scion7]

If Tchaikovsky was not interested in Brahms, it may well be because he was striving for an entirely different use of the musical language. - yeah, they pretty much thought each other's music was bad-tasting medicine.  The story of their spending an evening together in a mutual friend's house is amusing.  The gruff, classical-form Romantic Brahms and the dandy ultra-Romantic Tchaikovsky - but they were polite. 

[Karl Henning]

You've forgotten the a minor Trio?

[eyeresist]

Precisely my reaction to his music. I think what Tchaikovsky tried to do is use a mere sequencing of melodic material as a substitute for actual formal development. This is why i argued that he was "all inspiration", because that's precisely what his music is.

He could do variations, at least: see last movement of his Mozartiana suite, and the Rococo variations.

[eyeresist]

I'm just listening to Markevitch conducting the 3rd symphony and wondering, has this music ever been recorded with a chamber orchestra, or even in HIP style?  I think it would work. Tchaikovsky might even sound better without the weight of late-romantic gigantism upon him.

Later...
There don't seem to be any chamber or HIP recordings. Now contemplating the cycles of Jansons, Jarvi, Pletnev and Marriner (OOP on Capriccio). These four are probably the most Mozartian, "Classical" sounding choices.

[jwinter]

Um... err.... uh....

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/07/swan-lake-now-with-more-fellatio.html?tw_p=twt

[mahler10th]

If Tchaikovsky was not interested in Brahms, it may well be because he was striving for an entirely different use of the musical language. - yeah, they pretty much thought each other's music was bad-tasting medicine.  The story of their spending an evening together in a mutual friend's house is amusing.  The gruff, classical-form Romantic Brahms and the dandy ultra-Romantic Tchaikovsky - but they were polite. 

Polite indeed.  Brahms called Petr a 'talentless bastard.'  Like so many things Brahms was wrong in this.

[Karl Henning]

. . . Brahms called Petr a 'talentless bastard.'

I think you may have transposed the two composers there. Ilyich was wrong, too, though of course what one writes in a diary is one thing . . . .

[mahler10th]

I think you may have transposed the two composers there. Ilyich was wrong, too, though of course what one writes in a diary is one thing . . . .

Why, if I met Brahms on the street, I would burn his beard off.


Brahms beard on fire yesterday.

[Karl Henning]

Don't be hatin' on the beard! Though naturally, Ilyich's facial hair was rather smarter.

[Ataraxia]

Tchaikovsky can kiss my Brahmsian butt.

[Karl Henning]

Steady on, fella.

[Ataraxia]

...If I were to choose. Heehee.

[Lisztianwagner]

The dislike was mutual, Tchaikovsky pronounced Brahms to be a 'mediocre composer'.

[snyprrr]

Don't be hatin' on the beard! Though naturally, Ilyich's facial hair was rather smarter.

Are you serious? PT's facial hair takes a beating in some of those portraits. Yea, he looks pretty cool in some, but he seems to have scraggle problems on his sides, whereas Brahms' hair flows like a god's.

I always thought PT had that Michael Stipe-meets-Tom Hanks-Tragic look, very handsome, but, his personality takes away from his looks, whereas Brahms looks like he could be a dick but that would be ok,... basically because of the authoritarian beard. You can't mess with Brahms' beard now!

Have we a Baddest Composer Facial Hair Thread?

[Guido]

Tchaikovsky in fact had the best musical education of any of his Russian contemporaries, and while he lacked the emotional depth and harmonic originality of Mussorgsky, his work was typically well crafted and expertly orchestrated.

While I agree with you on most points regarding Tchaikovsky's genius, I found this sentence took me aback. Would you care to elaborate a bit?

[eyeresist]

Well, Muti's boxset arrived yesterday and so far it's pretty awesome. I think Karajan is probably next on my list, as I was surprised and impressed by samples of the early symphonies.

My question to the panel:

Does anyone know if Pappano is going to record 1-3? I'm very impressed by what I've heard so far, but if he's going to record the cycle I'll wait to buy the box.

[Brahmsian]

I am continuously amazed at the ability of finding a piece of classical music that once "did nothing for me", only months (or several years later!), in this specific example, to now make a remarkable impression and turn a once (meh, or blah piece) into a WOW, this is great piece!

For me, this has just occurred this week with one of Tchaikovsky's most famous pieces:  Romeo & Juliet Fantasy Overture.

I haven't been able to stop listening to this piece over the last week.   I almost literally used to detest this piece.  I've fallen in love with it now.

One reason is David Brown's biography on Tchaikovsky from 2007.  He talks a great deal about this piece, and describing it, and its various sections and motifs (ie. almost leitmotifs, a la Wagner).

It made an almost universally wide favourable impression, upon Tchaikovsky's revisions on all 5 of the "Mighty Handful" group of Balakirev, Cui, Mussorgsky, Rimsky-Korsakov and Borodin.

And now it has also done the same with me.

PS - Just another reminder of how important it is to never, ever give up on a piece of music that you may not like.  It may take years, but eventually upon revisiting later one - can indeed make you change your tune on it. 

This means:  Perhaps someday I can the same turnaround impression with Francesca da Rimini (currently another ho-hummer for me), but I will revisit it.