Somebody explain to me what's so special about Liszt.

Started by Josquin des Prez, September 11, 2007, 05:42:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lethevich

Luke - to be honest I forgot about the earlier works in the Années de Pèlerinage set - I generally gravitate towards book 3 especially. Book 1, and some of book 2 are very exciting, but are also definitely way more overtly crowd-pleasing.

Quote from: karlhenning on September 12, 2007, 04:51:39 AM
But, I won't permit this as anything like a generalization! :-)

Tasso and Orpheus, at the very least, deserve better.  Nor do I necessarily think the worse of Les Préludes or Mazeppa for being somewhat 'lighter'.

I should give them more of a chance, but it's shame they're obscure enough to not have a wide range of top interps to choose between. Les Preludes is great, and justly famous, but some of the others felt like their long duration was sustained by more than a little bluster compared to the inspired ones by Dvořák and Strauss (Sibelius is so different that I don't think he can be compared). With the current lack of recordings, it could just be that a conductor has yet to "get" the pieces - some works are notoriously difficult to perform well - but as yet I do not know :)
Peanut butter, flour and sugar do not make cookies. They make FIRE.

Josquin des Prez

#21
Quote from: lukeottevanger on September 12, 2007, 04:40:21 AM
IMO Orage, from the first book of the Annees. is pretty much banging all the way, although, given the subject matter, that's probably appropriate. Anyway, it's highly polished banging.

At his best, Liszt is an extremely subtle and adventurous composer. I tend to stay shy of his more virtuosic works but even there is much of great value. For me, however, it is late Liszt and, often, early Liszt, where the real gems are to be unearthed. Late Liszt needs no advertising, I'd have hope, but essentially it is a small corpus of works for piano, small chamber groups - the first Elegy!  :o - or organ which do things never done before and in a way never done since. Early Liszt is sometimes equally adventurous, in a more extravagant way. The Apparitions, for instance, explore rhythmic dislocations in a way no other 19th century composer ever did (at least, not until the end of the century) in order to create their fantastical, ephemeral mood. Wonderful stuff.

Fascinating. Could you provide a detailed list of works which fall under this category?

One piece i really liked was a St Francois D'assise (one of the two 'legends') performed by Vladimir Feltsman (who also provides a rather sober and intelligent interpretation of the b minor sonata which makes the piece sound more clever then it really is). I rather enjoyed the darker, ethereal mood he creates here,  even though i still wouldn't call it a true composition in the real sense.

BTW, when i started this thread i really didn't consider his orchestral or choral music. His reputation has a pianist is so entrenched i actually forgot all about it. I have a recording of his Faut symphony performed by Bernstein, which is good but not exactly a masterpiece. I also have his piano concertos (Zimerman) which i absolutely despise.


karlhenning

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on September 12, 2007, 06:32:58 AM
I have a recording of his Faut symphony performed by Bernstein, which is good but not exactly a masterpiece.

You do know better, don't you, than to dismiss a piece as "not exactly a masterpiece" on the basis of a single recording?

QuoteI also have his piano concertos (Zimerman) which i absolutely despise.

A pity! I find them entirely beguiling.

quintett op.57

Quote from: karlhenning on September 12, 2007, 04:51:39 AM
But, I won't permit this as anything like a generalization! :-)

Tasso and Orpheus, at the very least, deserve better.  Nor do I necessarily think the worse of Les Préludes or Mazeppa for being somewhat 'lighter'.
His orchestral production is superb, my favorites being Tasso and Hungaria.
It's not surprising how influential he was (hear Wagner - Strauss - Debussy - Ravel - Schönberg and even Stravinsky's orchestral works I noticed recently).

I think he's neglected for strange reasons which are not objective, things like "he's not intellectual enough for me, my dear".
He's music is often powerful, and obviously some people tend to hear only this in his works.




BachQ

Quote from: karlhenning on September 12, 2007, 04:18:49 AM
I glady endorse the Totentanz and both concerti, as well.

Yet, these were not included in your original post .........  :P  >:D

karlhenning

I couldn't well include all the Liszt I like in one post, mon vieux

BachQ

Quote from: karlhenning on September 12, 2007, 09:28:56 AM
I couldn't well include all the Liszt I like in one post, mon vieux

The transgression has been established and confirmed.

We will give due weight to your defense as we deliberate upon the appropriate penalty and sentence.   >:D


Haffner

I think that Liszt had alot to do with pushing the improvisational element in music composition. There are many pieces he wrote that strike me as having taken the mid ("super-soloing") portion of Beethoven's 5th PC and driven that aspect right to the hilt and beyond. Chopin certainly deserves credit with this as well, though I hear more Mozart and J. Haydn than LvB in his work.

Josquin des Prez

Quote from: Haffner on September 12, 2007, 09:49:04 AM
I think that Liszt had alot to do with pushing the improvisational element in music composition. There are many pieces he wrote that strike me as having taken the mid ("super-soloing") portion of Beethoven's 5th PC and driven that aspect right to the hilt and beyond. Chopin certainly deserves credit with this as well, though I hear more Mozart and J. Haydn than LvB in his work.

I don't know, his music just strikes me as a collection of improvised ramblings for the most part. It's like he never actually sat down and composed something, you know? He followed what felt good under his fingers and pronto, a new piece was born. That doesn't sound very 'Beethoven-like' to me, particularly considering how hard the latter agonized over every little detail and minutiae.


Haffner

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on September 12, 2007, 10:00:58 AM
I don't know, his music just strikes me as a collection of improvised ramblings for the most part. It's like he never actually sat down and composed something, you know? He followed what felt good under his fingers and pronto, a new piece was born. That doesn't sound very 'Beethoven-like' to me, particularly considering how hard the latter agonized over every little detail and minutiae.






I understand and sympathise with your pique. Liszt can be one of those composers you really have to listen to attentively. But I must tell you that the extra patience is well worth it, J.

Although an indefatigable improviser myself, I am fully aware of how alienating extended flights of improvisation can be for listeners.

karlhenning

I've heard people complain about alleged emptiness in Liszt, for hours more than I have heard any "dud" music from Liszt's pen.

Period.

Somebody explain to me what's so special about kvetching over Liszt?

karlhenning

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on September 12, 2007, 10:00:58 AM
I don't know, his music just strikes me as a collection of improvised ramblings for the most part. It's like he never actually sat down and composed something, you know? He followed what felt good under his fingers and pronto, a new piece was born. That doesn't sound very 'Beethoven-like' to me, particularly considering how hard the latter agonized over every little detail and minutiae.

This post just strikes me as an improvised rambling for the most part. It's like you haven't sat down and considered the music, you know?

vanessa_zang

I never much liked the music of Schubert and Bruckner. I like them better now, but still not too much. BUT, all the while, I knew it was my loss.

There is nothing particularly wrong with not liking any composer's music. But to say that Liszt, Bruckner or any other composer was just a rambling hack is beyond (insert word of your choice here).

Haffner

Quote from: karlhenning on September 12, 2007, 10:15:21 AM
I've heard people complain about alleged emptiness in Liszt, for hours more than I have heard any "dud" music from Liszt's pen.

Period.

Somebody explain to me what's so special about kvetching over Liszt?




I can sympathise with these remarks as well. But I had to listen to alot of Liszt compositions with foreknowledge of their off-the-cuff brilliance to really understand and love them. So I can see where Josquin might have a problem at first.

En meme temps, I understand Karl's position regarding the immense value of Liszt's output.

Dancing Divertimentian

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on September 12, 2007, 10:00:58 AM
I don't know, his music just strikes me as a collection of improvised ramblings for the most part. It's like he never actually sat down and composed something, you know? He followed what felt good under his fingers and pronto, a new piece was born.

Well, I don't think Liszt exactly deserves that. Most things (piano-wise, anyway) sound neatly tied together to me.

There's certainly nothing 'rambling' about his hypnotic, quixotic Feux follets. Of course, this piece is a bit of a miniature so we should take that into account but the point is you don't get high quality results like this from 'rambling', addled thoughts.




Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

Kullervo

Quote from: karlhenning on September 12, 2007, 06:48:52 AM
A pity! I find them entirely beguiling.

Beguiling is definitely the word I'd use. I really don't get them at all, but I shall persevere. :D

Hector

Quote from: Lethe on September 12, 2007, 04:16:42 AM
No love for Totentanz from anybody either :( It's not "deep" but it's melodic and very engaging :)

Yes, of course, both versions!


JoshLilly

QuoteSomebody explain to me what's so special about Liszt.


He did stuff.