Reminder that you should not reply to the paragraph autist because he is baiting and/or his lack of knowledge and our based (and fair) criticism has lead him to become even more aggressive and delusional.
I listen to a lot of Debussy, Ravel, Bach, Chopin, and a bit of Shostakovich. Any recs?
Nicholas Scott
Scriabin (unironically)
Brayden Cox
Buxtehude
Oliver Sanders
Dutilleux
Angel Murphy
Maybe I'm made more aggressive and no, that's really the reason. It's because of the name-calling, which you can indulge if you want, but it doesn't make me madder as much less patient and more condescending, as really just emboldens me in thinking that those with very contrary taste could not have worse reasons for it. >that will confuse him and also make threats on his life? Seems like that will get played very quickly. You could try it, but I have admit that I am ever so minusculely gratified when somebody attacks me like this, as you deserve to feel bothered by what I say. This is largely because of the nature of your responses, (which may seem circular), in which you are justly punished for lowering the level of discourse, but also I can't help but think that if you like certain music, that you should feel worse in some way because of it, and if I make reasonable comments that effectuates that end, I feel some small amount of satisfaction.
This maybe be petty, but we should not be fussy about innocent small comforts. I know it's not that innocent, because I am making some people miserable, even if they give the impression that they laugh at me. The majority of the general does not get this mad. As shocking as this may seem, I never find that stratagem to be necessary.
Austin Ward
thanks anons, any specific pieces you'd recommend as an introduction?
Any neo-Baroque pieces? This is a very specific idiom that is perfectly captured in this piece and seems so obvious, yet successful, I wonder why no composer has written like it to my knowledge. youtube.com/watch?v=HKQoJip-K9A&ab_channel=ConcertoClassics
Listening to Pfizner's Palestrina he sounds pretty modern using ideas from Palestrina's time.
Benjamin Thomas
As shocking as this may seem, whether you find that strategem to be necessary or not is irrelevant because you don't have the skills to pull it off convincingly.
Jordan Bailey
>something similar would be one minute of a piece that's 24 minutes long
>Pfitzner is too progressive, not simply, the way Korngold can be taken to be; he is also too conservative, if that means to be influenced by someone like Schoenberg. All this has audible consequences. We cannot find the brokenness of today in his work at first glance, but neither the unbroken yesterday. We find both, that is, none, and all attempts at classification falter.
Michael Morris
So, no attempt to even indicate what I said to upset you? I am assuming that I have made you mad, an assumption of which any efforts to disabuse me are welcome. Hmm. This, I like, only somewhat, though. Of course, it's not what I had in mind, but it's actually music. I think it loses its momentum around the fourth minute, unfortunately. I think I might listen more to this composer, however.
The Adagio is surprisingly directed. The rest of the piece is not in that style, so that's why I don't refer to it. I know people are content to dismiss what I say outright, but when you give such incoherent reasons, it gives me better reason to think less of you.
It's possible that you are merely pretending to be retarded, but considering the nature of the serious attempts at responses I've received, I think that's unlikely.
Brody Peterson
not a bad description, makes me wonder if Pfitzner hated himself
No, that is relevant, unless I should care if I am unable to perform that which I find unnecessary and valueless, judgements which you are free to cogently contradict.
Not even the beginning of the piece is, not even the first 40 seconds before we get romantic glissandi. You're just such an idiot, you hear a single diatonic line with some sparse harmony and your brain goes "baroque".
Jack Sanchez
Dallapiccola tartianas
youtu.be/Adsb2HokV6I This has some shades of neoclassical and even modernism especially for you paragraphautist
I think it's not a coincidence that attempts to ridicule me have coincided preceded people posting this composer more.
Perhaps I should delight in such pretty attempts backfiring, but truly, Pfitzner is really quite a mediocre composer, and there's no need to explore his music.
Camden Allen
Shut the fuck up, Hans.
Jaxon Hughes
Nothing is "backfiring". This is a well-oiled machine.
This seems inconsistent with , where the implication was that I suggested too short a duration, but now, apparently, I should have given an even shorter one.
Furthermore, the issue was that I said a minute instead of forty seconds? I wanted to indicate that it was after a minute that the Baroque imitation stopped. I even said it was "less successful." Even if this were an error on my part, any impartial observer would think your invective was very disproportionate to my misstep, which suggests a craving and blinding rancor on your part.
How fortunate I am that my opponents blunder so frequently and blatantly that I do not have to resort to sizing upon imagined mistakes, and even their abortive attempts at correction contain additional and easy objects for confutation.
Aaron White
So, the nature of this general is anons posting obviously bad composers as a joke, and others begin to genuinely like them? That explains Schnittke then, and I suppose the fascination with modernism here as a whole.
Michael Morales
You failed to comprehend 20th century music. Don't worry, most people do.
Just remember that composers like Ligeti and Stockhausen spend their entire lives learning and thinking about music - don't expect to "get" or "like" what they're doing straight away.
Its fine to say you don't like 20th century music, or don't like certain composers or pieces, but calling them mediocre and trying to act superior to them aint going to fly - you are massively inferior to them in knowledge and experience.
Right now you are on the left hand side of the Dunning-Kruger graph - full of confidence, but with minimal knowledge on the subject. As you learn more, you will realize you don't actually know what you're talking about, and then as you learn even more, you will be able to comprehend a serious discussion about 20th century music.
There isn't much point in us trying to "defend" these composers - you clearly aren't ready for them. Get comfortable with Bartok, Penderecki and Lutoslawski and then we can talk.
Cameron Collins
No the point is you don't know what you're talking about and both that isolating a minute of a romantic movement as an example of "neobaroque" is stupid as is calling the first minute of that piece "neobaroque". Basically as usual, your shit's all retarded and you talk like a fag"
Nothing too offensive with this music, really. Needlessly is made much worse by various points of devolution into modernism, but really, if more music like this were posted here, I would have much less reason to damn modernism.
I would say this music isn't so good, it's worth listening to troves of offensively awful music to find it.
I already answered this before it was a pasta. I could generate a new response, but there's no point. Repeating something does not disqualify the arguments against it.
Gavin Baker
Thanks for posting the most known symphony of one of the most known classical composers
Shut the fuck up, you philistine. The paste is absolutely spot on and you're a clueless piece of elitist shit. Your IQ is around 80 and your tastes match your personality: dry, autistic and annoying. I will literally make you eat my ass to fullness, then proceed to tie you down in a bathtub and leave you there until you shit yourself and fill it up and then the maggots and filth will devour your insides.
It's a good thing I always know what I'm talking about, that I didn't isolate a minute of a romantic movement as an example of "neobaroque," and that I didn't call the first minute of that piece "neobaroque."
The last two really seem like the same thing. I wouldn't be the surprised that this is the sort of poster that frequently calls what I write incoherent, and then writes in such a bizarrely repetitive manner.
Cooper Torres
>one of the most known classical composers And yet one of the most underrated...
>It's a good thing I always know what I'm talking about Right now you are on the left hand side of the Dunning-Kruger graph - full of confidence, but with minimal knowledge on the subject. As you learn more, you will realize you don't actually know what you're talking about, and then as you learn even more, you will be able to comprehend a serious discussion.
Elijah Sanchez
Somebody seems mad ;)
But really, is there any other reason you would make these threats? The only conclusion I can make is that you're maybe a little aggravated. Perhaps you just want to give that impression, but why?
Christopher Scott
Not him, but the paste is not spot on as it implies Stockhausen did something other than invert sections of tape.
Never saw the appeal in this piece. Finale is excellent, but most of the piece is fairly prosaic. Very inferior in almost every respect to Réminiscences de Robert le diable. Maybe there is some interpretation out there where I could sense the unity the piece, but I have yet to hear it.
Andrew Garcia
How the fuck can you even get this from the original text. Is this literally how your brain works?
The introductión is very atmospheric and dramatic (like the B minor sonata). Maybe the weakest part is the duetto, but has his tender moments
Thomas Myers
The irony is that to to dodge arguments like this, it would take an absurd level of confidence in one's knowledge that's likely unjustified. Don't actually argue with people who disagree with you, just say they think they're right because they don't know what they're talking about.
It's not like I'm going to be convinced this is the case by your saying that. You're just rationalizing your inability to have a discussion. If you really, really understood your subject and I didn't, you could easily dismantle every argument of mine, but it's just much easier to say I don't know what I'm talking about, especially since that's actually the case for you.
Logan Nguyen
Shut the fuck up, Hans.
Jaxson Jenkins
Seems like i'm back at my Zelenka phase
>tfw Zelenka died without getting married and having children >tfw Bach, Telemann and Pisendel were all huge Zelenkafags who admired him >tfw there's Justice in this world and now his music is blessed with God tier Recordings on period instruments I'm not even a HIPfag but Zelenka on HIP is AESTHETIC af And now Avant garde Zelenka Hipocondrie youtu.be/qa78V3uEA3U Overture youtu.be/-9Y6P8hf4I4
>Hipocondrie is especially odd, possessing as it does an enigmatic title whose meaning is long lost, and a rhythmic underpinning that appears to mimic the habanera! The numbers in the titles are a reference to the overall number of parts employed and not to “concertante” solo parts. In addition to the structural oddities mentioned, one finds some interesting and unusual melodic features that were also uncommon during the Baroque era. Generally, music was composed in four- or eight-measure phrase lengths, but Zelenka occasionally sets this rule aside and goes his own way. There are also abrupt and unexpected changes of key, the most glaring coming in the recapitulation of the opening movement of the Ouverture à 7 concertanti, where the orchestra migrates from the dominant to the expected home key, but by way of a side trip to a tonality that is so remote the effect is striking, and the final resolution therefore is far more satisfying than it would have otherwise been.
>both that isolating a minute of a romantic movement as an example of "neobaroque" is stupid as is calling the first minute of that piece "neobaroque" Feel free to explain how this isn't redundant, or how I could do one without doing the other.
Hint: this is the probably point where you give up and say that I'm too stupid for you to make a coherent argument, or something. Mentioning "Dunning-Kruger" is a bit played, though, so you might want to avoid that, but it still seems popular.
Connor Parker
Full of confidence, but with minimal knowledge on the subject. As you learn more, you will realize you don't actually know what you're talking about, and then as you learn even more, you will be able to comprehend a serious discussion.
Parker Sanders
It is, but the Sonata, (which I don't even like that much), delivers very quickly on the introduction. So does Mozart's overture for that matter.
Connor Anderson
Good post. Thank you for contributing to this thread, I am enjoying your benefactions of a high quality.
I'm not going to give up in spite of how stupid you are and the fact you wont understand.
The first statement is that isolating musical minutiae, as insignificant as a single minute, in just about ANY romantic work as an example of polystylism is absurd. The second statement is to say calling the first minute of that PARTICULAR piece "neobaroque" is preposterous. The overall effect is meant to assure you of your own stupidity.
Wyatt Bell
That's like telling Chris Chan he will get better at drawing; obscenely cruel.
My confidence is actually increasing the more I post here. This is largely due to comments like these, so attempts at humbling me, ideally, with strong arguments, would go farther than repeating the same pasta.
However, you actually removed "Dunning-Kruger," so good job. If had actually replaced it with an argument, that would have been better. Omitting the entirely of the post would have been worse than giving an argument, but better than posting the same thing again and again.
Kayden Baker
I am enjoying Alban Berg's beautiful first published work played magnificently by the wonderful Glenn Gould. youtube.com/watch?v=CVkhnBNnNjE
Yeah so, I finally found the ball scene. Wasn't nearly as interesting as Bruce Adolphe made it sound. He also brought up, in that lecture, Schubert being the first composer to use octatonicism. Does anyone have an example of that?
Xavier Thomas
Well, considering I'm not stupid, this actually isn't an issue, and if I don't understand, that would probably be due to your being incomprehensible. I believe in you, though, and I think I will perfectly understand your explanation, as fallacious as it might be.
You distinguished the two lines, but didn't say how I could one without the other. It's like if I said you failed to do something you claimed you would do, claimed you would do something in which you ultimately failed, in, and could not help but make claims and failing at things you attempted. You see how easy it is to rephrase things like in this manner? How I could have called something neobaroque without isolating it. I guess you could also point out that I typed something so stupid, thought something stupid, made such a stupid request, etc. all things I technically did, (at least, might be described by you as such), but are really quite redundant to point out, and repetitive to the extent that the essentially represent the same actions.
I also didn't do either of those things, lol. This is the point where you're going to have to be ready to quote me, break down what I said, and explain how your descriptions accurately follow from my statements, and, (assuming I am not convinced), I will differentiate what I said from what you implied.
You really want to go through with this? I welcome you do take this question as a bluff that I prefer you wouldn't do it, but the truth it, I'm giving you an idea what you're going to have to go through for me to admit that I'm wrong. I am not going to go through the effort of explaining why you misunderstood me, as I merely have to (negatively) say that I didn't say that, and then burden is your to prove otherwise. Expect me to weigh heavily on the definitions of certain words, which make all the difference.
I am a ravenous dung beetle when it comes to autistic shit like this. Indeed, I encyst upon it.
Zachary Diaz
>Well, considering I'm not stupid
I don't know if I can really be expected to suspend disbelief like that.
Michael Ramirez
Shut the fuck up, left side of Dunning-Kruger.
Daniel Jackson
It's a good thing you don't drop his last name. Perish the thought that anybody bothers to listen to Pfitzner by these futile attempts to insult me. That's really the most offensive part.
Caleb Scott
>prepares a long paragraph containing no coherent thoughts
Austin Gutierrez
checked
Joseph Campbell
I said shut the fuck up, Hans.
Logan Robinson
WHAT THE ACTUAL HELL IS THIS GUY TALKING ABOUT? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
Well, the thing, is, you're the Doning-Krugr graph, and that has to do with not knowing what you think you know. When you get to the right side, as opposed to the wrong one, you will know more, and then its the better side of the Donnie-Kergr graph. When that happens, you'll know you know more, but you'll know you don't know what you are talking about, so basically you're being doing what you're doing now, but knowing you don't know. Why you would keep talking about what you know you don't know is you're problem, but you really shouldn't. Eventually, when you're on the best side of the graph, the Dawney-Kroogerh one, you'll know you know, you'll know you're talking, and then you'll know about what you're talking about, and then you'll know.
Anthony Brown
I was amazed to learn about all the guises this mode had been used. Not only can romantic composers use it in a perfectly romantic way, Stravinsky uses it much more boldly, apparently Gershwin makes use of it all throughout American in Paris. Why I'm amazed is because Bartok and Messiaen manage to utilize it to their own completely distinct effects. Not to mention in Jazz, where its called the Diminished Scale, there is probably a whole new diversification of use there. That's one hell of a mode.
I wonder why these never get played at schools. I know I would have found the easier ones very useful in my beginnings. Much better than playing dry modes.
Andrew Rodriguez
That's not what I said, so if that's the high opinion you have of that technique, I feel more confident using it.
Oh, but I have to think about Dahnee-Kerroogerr, so I'm confident because I don't know what I don't know and I talk about it, but at least I know that, and at least I know I don't know, so I'm mostly there, really.
Andrew Jones
I don't get it, how did he complete his 9th symphony if he didn't complete his 8th symphony? Shouldn't the 9th be the 8th if he completed it first?
They put the numbers after he died Late Schubert was not thinking oh and now i'm going to make my epic 8 Symphony, his music was not being published or performed aside from his lieders Do you fucking homework are you the Baroquelet who thinks baroque sounds """" gay"'''" by any chance?
>Probably a sociopath as well. I really shouldn't confess it, but I am a little curious why you might think this. It's also a little inconsistent with saying that I am stupid and that's why I am so confident.
Maybe you're just ignorant about me, which makes you so confident. Donee-Krohghr, am I right? You really really get to know me, so then you know you don't know me, and then we can really serious discussion, or something.
Again, you don't really know me, do you? Read Dahni-Kroeger.
Michael Allen
Why should anyone want to know you? Knowing you is the very problem that is afflicting all of us right now. I don't really care if you take it in the ass or down the throat.
Easton Miller
Ahh I recognize this frog I know who you are, you're one of the Grosse Fuge haters Go Fuck yourself
So we could have a serious discussion. The problem is that you're really confident because you don't know me. You're at the left side, the side of Daunhe-Krewger. You actually don't know Daghny-Kruegr. This is what makes you confident and left side.
Seems like a lot of noise and blustering. I have to say I prefer the overture even the Nutcracker, which at least has unity. That this followed Swan Lake is a mystery, as that work's overture is far superior.
Henry Ortiz
>Its a mystery that a lesser work followed the high point of a composer's career
Stupid as usual, Hans.
Elijah Lewis
>the high point of a composer's career Well, there's a faulty assumption. In terms of variety and consistency, Nutcracker, musically at least, was far superior.
Also, I specifically had the overture in mind, ad the mystery that he adopted such a inferior approach compared to both Nutcracker and Swan Lake. Actually dispensing knowledge as to why this ballet required a less unified overture, or why he just couldn't manage a better them would be better.
Maybe you're the mount stupid because the left Dawning-Kwugr. The problem is you don't know you don't know, so you're not going to know you don't know, and then know you don't know, and then know what you know so serious discussion.
Adam Hill
In all fairness you're right. I'm only slightly more interested in further discovery of Tchaikovsky than I am interested in further discovery of (you).
Oliver Stewart
it's an introduction, not an overture what starts "sleeping beauty". Not the same thing. The introduction last like 40 seconds
Jordan Wilson
Hmm, I will allow that distinction, but my point is that compared to Nutcracker and Swan Lake, it has a very inferior opening, (and the opening of Nutcracker is nothing to write home about). In ignorance, I might speculate it was Tchaikovsky's attempt to write an opening that integrated numerous themes from the ballet, and this was much less successful than when he focused on writing a single unified work as an opening to one based on a theme that would recur throughout the ballet, as unity was never his strong point.
To make it relevant to its first mention, it sounds like Wager because of how sloppy and amateurish it is, though even Wagner's worst overtures after a certain point where better than this.
John Turner
>than I am interested in further discovery of (you). Right now you are on the left hand side of the Dunning-Kruger graph - full of confidence, but with minimal knowledge on the subject. As you learn more, you will realize you don't actually know what you're talking about, and then as you learn even more, you will be able to comprehend a serious discussion about me.
Christopher Reyes
I hope I stay on the peak of mount stupid
Connor Moore
See, if you actually knew about Dohnny-Krurder, you would know that if you were on Mount Stupid, you wouldn't know you where there, so that means you know more than think you know. You probably don't know what you're talking about, so we can't have a serious discussion. You're at the point that's not right or wrong on the graph.
Evan Morales
No, I guess I never ventured up there in the first place. That's a relief.
>it implies Stockhausen did something other than invert sections of tape The absolute state of your posts. Do not speak of Stockhausen again for the next 5 years.
Can we establish "essential readings to discuss classical music before posting in /classical/" or something to spice things up a bit (and while at it, get rid of certain autistic qualities which reside within our general)? Mostly everyone here is either shitposting and baiting -which is fine in itself. Do as you see fit since this proposition doesn't specifically concern those fields of expertise- or having a so called discussion in which, no matter the views, honored anons just pretty much regurgitate some shit they learnt from a Wikipedia article, YouTube videos, babby's first theory book or some other atrocious God only knows what sources.
Go back to r/classicalmusic faggot This ain't a chart general
Hudson Hughes
It's worth mentioning that this place is not R*ddit or Talk Classical by any means nor does a Mongolian basket weaving forum general have to resemble or act like those braindead boomers. Still, I'd actually argue that /classical/ as it is now (and as it has been) is in reality infested with a bunch of normies who are not only weighing this whole fucking general down, but are keeping up the status quo without any intentions of improving their posts, themselves as individuals or /classical/ as a whole; perhaps just to keep their supply of entertainment nice and easy to digest to their limited brains. There's always the beginning where you might not be able to post or contribute anything insightful and so you join in on what you can: bumping, posting memes, baiting with newfound trivia about the composers lives, belittling certain composers and stylistic periods for the (You)s, joining and starting discussions with the little knowledge you learnt from some lurking on interwebs and telling people to go back to R*ddit and tripfags like Poly to fuck off. There truly is nothing wrong doing this at the beginning (especially if you're not in your 20s), but when this continues for years and your whole presence and identity in the general is almost solely based on this non-constructive "for the chuckles" -mentality, you will be regressing the developement of the discussion in the general as a whole, but maybe even more importantly you will stay stuck as an individual.
Why would you feel obligated to listen to new works? Everything being made now is garbola.
Jayden Mitchell
>tfw Cesar Franck was the logical conclusion of the Romantic Era >tfw Bach/Beethovian aesthetics mixed with Lisztian/Wagnerian harmony, produced conservatism and progressiveness in music Brahms could only dream of
Why aren't you listening to the greatest Romantic /classical/?
i have pretty much proved by myself that if you listen to classical music while reading you do it faster, if not, then why do so many 'classical music mix for studying' videos exist on youtube?
Jayden Rogers
kys
Jace Bell
Based and Zelenka pilled. The more I listen to Zelenka, the more I'm convinced the baroque era wasn't such a bourgeois and assfuckingingly gay era in music for the exception of Bach and Scarlatti. He has a religious piety and passion that rivals the greatest Renaissance composers
Wyatt Nguyen
Mahler is trite, Franck is genius
Kevin Howard
Couperin is worth listening to as well
Jace Hill
>and a rhythmic underpinning that appears to mimic the habanera! I'm a simple man, You say Spanish, Me gusta
b-b-but-t poly is going to unleash his Symphony s-soon n s-save classical r-r-right
Isaac Taylor
I imagine he would need it, since the exact opposite is suggested by his work.
Alexander Richardson
>Read wikipedia article on composer >composer's composition methods, notable works, stylistic features and influences are integrated with his 5-page biography
poly's symphony has been done for months - most of the writing was done in 2014 / 2015 anyhow.
Juan Parker
Franck has nothing to do with Mahler or Bruckner. Strictly speaking, he bears much more in common with early Scriabin.
Ryder Peterson
Yeah and its much more like an album of incidental music without some celluloid to accompany it, than a symphony.
Easton Martin
How do I learn to like piano music? I try but every time I have horrible flashbacks to having three sisters that all played piano throughout my childhood and were terrible.
Asher Howard
Gave the symphony another listen, it was aight. I mean its fine music but not particularly spec-
>he bears much more in common with early Scriabin. Suddenly my love of Franck has deepened tremendously. Is it his use of the 9ths and 13th extensions in his music and the mysticism?
Simply one of the best Quintets ever written, alongside Schumann's, Borodin's, Dvorak's and Faure's, but Faure's C minor Quintet will forever remain supreme. The best thing about Franck is his oeuvre is short and sweet, and almost everything he's ever written is a masterpiece of the highest order.
James White
I actually play with my own orchestra so I can get the full soundwaves, way higher quality than flac.
Lucas Cook
I'm going to have to pull you up there for not mentioning Brahm's Piano Quintet. Its practically the quintessence of the form.
Angel Powell
somebody posted this in the other thread. Its pretty neato.
Sure but you guys need to shill way harder and more shamelessly outside of the general thread.
Nicholas Sullivan
what's with the asspain aspie?
Ian Harris
Bump
Elijah Thompson
>listen Ah, a neophyte I see.
Isaac Bell
Ross made a comprehensive and interesting book about 20th century music from Strauss and Mahler to Brian Eno and Georg Friedrich Haas. The book doesn't "need" to defend anything. It provides information and interesting perspectives and stories.
Why am I not surprised that /classical/ doesn't like reading? It goes well with all these uneducated and impulsive shitty opinions and giant egos, the grand culmination of which is the paragraph autist who probably shitposts with thesaurus.com on his side and cries himself to sleep every night with the thought that he's the only sensible person left in the world.
gotta stay pleb if you want to maintain those pleb opinions.
Carter Wright
I just find it odd that it's somewhat still fashionable to not read and even hold pride in purposefully not educating yourself.
Carson Lee
I'm going to be humble, its just not my thing dude i've never liked reading but I like the music I'm decent at the piano tho Also this general is not THAT important, to me at least.
Aiden Gonzalez
Also this is not Yea Forums
Andrew Taylor
Playing an Instrument is much more important than reading those commie books Yea Forums fags should go back I dont want to read how many times Alma Cucked Mahler oh no wait i've already have
Reading is simply a way to acquire knowledge. If you don't have that knowledge, don't be surprised when you can't comprehend music posted here, and get derided when you try to defend your ignorant positions.
Cooper Robinson
This. I have nothing against people who don't read and stuff but to take pride in being an uninformed cunt and spouting nonsense like "renaissance/baroque/modern music (the most common perpetrators and easiest to attack) sux lol xddd" with zero references is what I'm attacking. You don't like something? You probably don't get it, so keep it to yourself.
Gavin Jenkins
>don't be surprised when you can't comprehend music posted here, and get derided when you try to defend your ignorant positions. Good i dont care also if you're talking 20th Music i'm one of the defenders of this.
Jaxson Sullivan
>reading is for commies This explains why most intellectuals (especially in academia) are Marxists and/or enlightened absolutists and at the same time the most disillusioned with reality.
Don't you guys realise Alma cucked everybody? Zemlinsky (poor bastard), Mahler, Klimt, Gropius and probably a hundred other sorry bastards we don't know about.
>In fall 1897, Alma began studying composition with Alexander von Zemlinsky. Zemlinsky and Alma fell in love and kept their relationship a secret. Alma would tease Zemlinsky about what she thought were his ugly features, saying she could easily have "ten others" to replace him. She also noted that to marry Zemlinsky would mean she would "bring short, degenerate Jew-children into the world". As the relationship grew strained, Zemlinsky visited her less and less. On 1 November 1901 she attended Zuckerkandls' salon where she began a flirtation with Gustav Mahler. In the month of November, while still in a relationship with Zemlinsky, she started an affair with Mahler. By 28 November, Mahler and Alma were engaged. However, it wasn't until 12 December that she wrote to Zemlinsky about her engagement.
>She allowed him to kiss and caress her, permitting him every intimacy but the ultimate, thereby almost driving him to madness. For his part, he knew how to arose Alma´s wakening sexuality with a passion which allowed her never to forget his »virtuoso hands«. The relationship was an emotional roller-coaster, and Alma tortured Zemlinsky for two years until, in 1902, she decided against him and in favour of marriage to Gustav Mahler, who was twenty years her senior. >Zemlinsky's song Symphony "Lyric Suite " is a reflection on the unfortunate love for Alma. Zemlinsky was inspired to it by Gustav Mahler's "Das Lied von der Erde", but refused letting his work premiered together with Mahler's unfinished 10th Symphony which was Mahler's reaction to Alma's love affair with the architect Walter Gropius.
Masturbating with regular porn meanwhile hearing beethoven all piano concertos (eight)
Ayden Fisher
>regular porn >beethoven Bluepilled
Nathaniel Ortiz
This board fucking sucks. Not a newfag, just hit with a sudden realization of great truth.
Lincoln James
for my fetishes I listen 20th russians mostly
Kayden Green
Any /classical/ recs for a metalhead? I like dark, gloomy works with lots of contrasts, like Prokofiev's first violin sonata and Mahler's sixth symphony.
The second is a piano concerto in D major Op.61, which is a transcription of the violin concerto to a piano concerto (we have to remember that the violin concerto had little success at this time) youtube.com/watch?v=Wrqunl3LmlE
And finally there is fragments of another piano concerto in D major (hess 15) which beethoven abandoned. There is a reconstruction of the first movement. youtube.com/watch?v=WXYL4GycNZE
Tyler Edwards
Thanks user
Landon Taylor
Lunch Break with Shostakovich SQ 15 by the Taneyev quartet **adagio intensifies** Absolute doomer-core
I bet you like Horowitz, zimerman, rubenstein, argerich.
Connor Wilson
literally what is wrong with any of those pianists?
Angel Lopez
Nothing, he's just being a contrarian faggot. It's easy to shit on people who spend their entire lives learning and thinking about music, especially on the internet.
friendly reminder to ignore any posters that don't play an instrument or sing
Gavin Hughes
Whats an absolute unique good take on the piano sonatas of beethoven? I'm asking for something controversial like gould, i'm sure there's something since this works may be the most recorded piano works of all time.
Andrew Fisher
I want to compose a piece for piano; do I need to follow a form?
Liam Wood
no, but forms were used because they worked very well, so you should at least understand what the forms are and why they work
Jacob Sanders
nah just do a fantasia
Elijah Hughes
i blame Alma
Matthew Jackson
I'm asking for recordings
Jaxon Adams
Thank you. I was actually just thinking of a simple improvisation -- I don't have the stamina for a fantasia. youtube.com/watch?v=eWkO-ZGMKGQ
He, along with Bruckner gives me hope that even at my advanced age I could be a composer. Satie was basically very lazy. His composition method was clearly to noodle until he found something that sounded good to him. His music lacks the virtuosity of Debussy because he was a mediocre piano player as well. Bruckner just gives me hope because he didn't compose anything until he was 37. But Satie is like the champion of the common man for composing.
Logan Baker
>he didn't compose anything until he was 37 Nice. >Satie He was btfo by a 10/11 year old kid though. youtube.com/watch?v=PbCsHTonpUg
Julian Robinson
How does this constitute being BTFO?
Blake Mitchell
Anyone at the symphony tonight?
Caleb Brooks
Dark like my soul. Just kidding. I don't feel like I would be satisfied composing something at Satie's level. There is a part of me that wants to start composing at a late age too but there just isn't enough time it seems. Is it even worth trying? youtube.com/watch?v=dv44dmjbHXg This is what I'm aiming for. I can already play pieces like this but coming up with something from nothing is a completely different beast.
Isaiah Scott
How based is this program tonight? Beethoven - leonore overture Brahms - violin concerto Liszt - Hungarian Rhapsody 4 Sibelius - valse triest Verdi - ballet for the queen
