Started by Paul-Michel, April 25, 2008, 05:54:19 AM
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: premont on April 27, 2008, 01:01:52 PMYour point of view seems immediately more fruitful than most I have seen until now. I will bear your words in mind.
Quote from: Sforzando on April 27, 2008, 05:26:26 PMDonwyn, can you elaborate?
Quote from: premont on April 28, 2008, 05:08:32 AMI understand Donwyn so, that you (or one) should not look at Schuberts music (instrumental music) as consisting only of melodi and chordal accompaniment, but you should look at what happens in the inner parts, Donwin in this way suggesting the presence of some polyphonic writing. I can not say, that I think Schuberts music immediately invites to such a perspective, or it may be the attitude of most performers, which make me think so. But the idea is thought-provoking, why I take it ad notam.
Quote from: premont on April 27, 2008, 01:48:52 PMNo, you are wrong. Some years ago I decided to investigate Chopin thoroughly. I had always been fascinated by his extraordinary idiomatic piano writing, so I spent about three months listening exclusively to Chopin, scores in hand. Too much repetition gradually caused my interest in his seductive melodies to fade considerably, and I reached some sort of saturation point, but fortunately my stubbornness prompted me to continue my listening, and of course I overcame the deadlock and found out, that there is much more in his music than melting melodies in elegant coating, and as you now may guess, I ended up liking especially the Preludes, the Etudes and the Nocturnes very much, even if I - in the end - prefer music from another age. But I understand easily, why some people may harbour a strong passion for Chopin. I have not reached to that point with Schubert yet.
Quote from: Paul-Michel on April 25, 2008, 05:54:19 AMIt is my personal conviction that out of every composer I know, Schubert must surely be considered the most consistently brilliant.
Quote from: Paul-Michel on April 25, 2008, 05:54:19 AMAm I a madman?
Quote from: donwyn on April 28, 2008, 09:50:15 PMBut in my experience, on record anyway, it's an uncommon thing to encounter a performer who's willing to sacrifice the 'tunefulness' to get to the more decadent side of the music. Fortunately there are those who DO take a liking to this side of Schubert and it's to them I warm to most.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on April 27, 2008, 10:51:48 AMWell, ok, but i was trying to make a point there. Schubert is one of those composers that i can only listen to after extended breath of times because i have to make sure i'm in the best possible mood to enjoy his melodic and emotional content to it's fullest.
Quote from: quintett op.57 on April 29, 2008, 08:47:44 AMThe development of a work like the String quintet is absolutely gripping.
Quote from: quintett op.57 on April 29, 2008, 08:47:44 AMThe development of a work like the String quintet is absolutely gripping. His talent for this is obvious. His ability to write long chamber and piano pieces proves it (more than 40mn for many of them).Although he's probably less complex than Bach, Beethoven or Schumann, the way he uses his material is not less interesting to listen. Even his first quartet, composed at the age of 12 or 13, does not lack interest (without equalling the art of fugue or LvB's last quartets of course )
Quote from: B_cereus on April 29, 2008, 12:41:13 PMI love Schubert's piano sonatas. As Schnabel said of them, "they are a safe supply of happiness"
Quote from: premont on April 29, 2008, 05:24:42 AMThanks, donwyn for this elaboration, which I find most useful. Now I would like to ask you , which performers you think in the most clear way express, what you are describing. Or better, I would ask for some relevant recommendations.
Quote from: Josquin des Prez on April 29, 2008, 08:02:13 PM and i think it's worth mentioning that neither Bach nor Beethoven had written anything any where near as inspired as the C major Quintet, or the G major quartet in their early periods.
Quote from: lukeottevanger on April 30, 2008, 06:33:37 AMWell, that's answered that, then. Rod has spoken his mighty word (and strewn upon the faithful an abundance of clips), and the pernicious anti-Beethovenites of the Schubert Cult have been exposed as the fools they are. Go, Rod!
Quote from: Rod Corkin on April 30, 2008, 06:56:45 AMThanks! But I'm not making it up, there are plenty of quotes by musically educated persons on the web anyone can find in seconds if they know how to use a search engine. The thing is it is not Beethoven he trounces (though he seems to be their favourite target), but by default all the others too, even the small town composers you like Luke. It would not be a problem but young naiive persons visiting forums such as this may start to think these notions about Schubert are true unless they are addressed in a more critical fashion.
Quote from: Rod Corkin on April 30, 2008, 04:03:08 AMBy coincidence I ran a comparison of string quintets, including the C Major and Op29, at my site a few weeks back, including a number of tracks, videos etc. Even the Schubert fans could not maintain your position above after these demonstrations. Another example of the Schubertian cult exposed.
Quote from: lukeottevanger on April 30, 2008, 07:10:27 AMOh, but I do think Schubert trounces most of the 'small town composers I like', Rod. I have enough perspective on the weight my tastes carry to know that my own personal favourites are not necessarily the very finest. Though of course some of them are - Schubert and Beethoven both figure on the list of these personal favourites, and they both are among those finest. So what if Schubert is so many degrees below Beethoven, or above him, or equal to him? - he writes music which gives things Beethoven never gave, and vice versa. And so I wouldn't want to be without either.
Page created in 0.043 seconds with 24 queries.