Very nice. Brahms/Schumann colab: how could not be. Intermezzo always stood out to me as special. Played as stand alone quite frequently. Thanks for posting.
Proof that Schumann is under-rated and better than Brahms and many romantics in his time; Chopin, Liszt, Paganini, Verdi, Beethoven, Rossini and many others.
Gotta say, I just love the first three movements of this piece. The last one... is a Schumann finale. It's nice, but somehow kind of awkward. Still, his Intermezzo is lovely, so I can't hold it against him too much.
I get what you mean. Though, the ending of the fourth movement is among the most pure, most glorious and most marvelous finale ever written for the violin and piano!
I don't think it does explicitly. However, it repurposes the main theme from the first movement at 15:14, which contains elements of F-A-E. Furthermore, Brahms would go on to use the F-A-E motif at 12:03 in the third movement of his third piano sonata.
It is not so immediately apparent where the F-A-E keys appear in the scherzo and the finale. Could someone point them out? It's quite transparent in the 1st and 2nd movements.
I know the third movement pretty transparently references the first movement's main theme, but that's not based on FAE as far as I can tell either :/ The finale's first three chords are pretty transparently based on F, A, and E, though. It's an Faug6, Adim (though the E-flat is spelled as a D-sharp), and E7. The figure also appears at around 19:46. Incidentally, I find it incredibly interesting that almost every appearance of FAE takes the lower A (i.e. goes down a sixth and then up a fifth, rather than up a third and then down a fourth). The upper A seems to me like the more obvious way of writing those three notes - though maybe that's why they chose not to do that.
Such a shame!! I love this sonata, I love Schumann and the first movement is my favourite, but as a Brahms hater, his Scherzo was indeed a joke, but not a funny joke, he just ruined my favourite sonata so I have to stick to a Schumann or Dvorak sonata. Disappointed in you Brahms. I cannot see anything worthy in the Scherzo, to me it's just a waste of 5 minutes. And to think that the 'great' Joachim only published that movement of the sonata! I find that utterly disgraceful, but the genius and beauty of Schumann and his pupil make up for it, or at least to an extent. (expecting many dislikes, feel free to send them)
you can think of Brahms what you want...no one will care. But you should know that Schumann was more than impressed by him, saw in Brahms the new rising star on the european music horizone, before Brahms had even published one single piece of music.
@@sebribo1873 What makes you think that I do not know of Schumann's appreciation of Brahms? And what does that have to do with the controversy that I (may or may not) uphold? And, in continuation with the first point, I know of his (Schumann's) reverence towards Mendelssohn and Chopin and Mozart and Berlioz, and disagree with him such. I do have controversial musical opinions, and I do not care if nobody cares (or at least the general majority that does not choose to care so much as to reply). I'm not going to change this determination for the sake of a majority in the musical world! And when did I assert that my opinions were truths? When did I avoid room for disagreement? Ending your short reply with Schumann's opinion of Brahms despite his compositional void is like saying that Schumann was impressed by Brahms but not as a composer, but as a hedgehog of a person (unlikely) or a piano virtuoso (of which I do to accept him but the stage of piano virtuosi was so great that it would not mean so much to be impressed by Brahms, especially when Clara Wiek was his (Schumann's) wife) but I find nothing of notice or of interest in Brahms. Why don't you try change my mind? Why do you like Brahms?
@@Deadbushfan1618 I have to disagree. Brahms was one of the greatest romantic era composers. his music has emotional depth and melodic richness, as seen in the poco allegretto from his 3rd symphony, and extremely refined craftsmanship, as seen in the intricate voicing from his intermezzos for piano (especially the a major and b-flat minor ones). His symphonic orchestration is immaculate. His 4th symphony shows his use of perfect blending of strings/woodwinds/brass to create a rich, lush sound. That symphony and his 1st symphony both show his mastery of contrapuntal writing as well, as they both have 4 and sometimes 5 layers of completely different material and yet it just works so well. As for the common critique that his music is too "academic"/dense, the "Brahms lullaby" and Brahm's Hungarian Dances completely disprove. They have some of the most catchy tunes of all of the romantic era. His chamber work is also crazy good. His b major piano trio is just *chefs kiss*. how can you not fall in love with the opening theme in the first movement. The third movement is so melancholic and one of the few movements in any piano trio that doesn't just double the violin and cello in octaves the whole time. As for your critique on the Scherzo from the F-A-E sonata, you don't actually explain why it's bad. you just make empty insults like "a waste of 5 minutes". It's super energetic and very inventive. So many creative uses of the violin. For example, the figure from the 3rd measure is written in such a way that it will easily crescendo, reach a peak, and decrescendo all in one bow which perfectly matches the phrase. Also his Scherzo has the most interesting use of the F-A-E motif out of all the movements (not saying that the other movements are bad. I love the other movements too!). There are so many aspects of this movement that are indeed "worthy". The Trio section is so pretty. It goes from peaceful, to uncomfortable, to sad, and back to peace so seamlessly, so quickly. - a brahms lover
@@kartikpatri1142 Note: I'm not going to write 'in my opinion' after everything I say to increase readability of this response: Emotional Depth and melodic richness do not exist in the noise of brughms. His life had no good emotions to express in his music and he was not a melodist. Perhaps his symphonic arrangements are 'intentional' but even Handel was a greater mind at effects. I remember when i listened to Brughms's b major piano trio the first time... nothing special. Second time, headache. *Chef's kiss* Who doesnt like a porcupine? That piano trio is nothing compared to the Tchaikovsky, Schumann, Dobrzynski, Beethoven, Haydn, Dvorak, or perhaps going into the niche category, Beriot, Reinecke, R Franck, C Franck Borodin, Hurlstone, Alyabyev, Gade, etc. ones for the reason of beauty, melodic and expressive. Want counterpoint? Renaissance and Baroque are at your disposal. You also get spirituality, which bruhgms lacks. The Hungarian dances are frankly disgusting. They may be 'catchy' to some philistines or the general public but it reeks of uncivilised, likely disruptive, crude, folk environments (not that I believe in this stereotype of country civilisation, just the pub feel). Catchyness is based on rhythm mainly (I think with inductive reasoning) so this does not show any beauty. How come Liszt got in trouble for his hungarian raphsody and brughms didn't?!? I agree with you, the year-old comment was phrased rather badly. However, many of these are in my nature; nonetheless I will elaborate here. The opening bars have no melody, with the piano (paino in this circumstance) finally introducing movement but into a place of insanity. The use of thirds and the violin g string so sharply creates a feel of 'cool' to some people, but I would compare this to the 'music' (noise) of our day, where rhythmic emphasis is used to attract 'views' (or listens? irdk) Therefore the violin is turned into a percussion instrument, not only torture for the instrument but for the ears of the audience. Creative use of violin? The g string can be deep and moving, but to use it sharply is not the way to go. Crescendo and decrescendo in one bow is merely elementary. Furthermore, technique can allow the same effect in TWO bows without transition such that it flows. If you want violin innovation that doesnt make violin a percussion instrument, try ernst, paganini, saint lubin, lipinski, slavik, etc. that can turn a violin into a woodwind among other things. What brughms did is not innovation and nor is it rare as many musical performers do such things with notes (no doubt that you have noticed that before)The trio section is boring quite simply. Even if it has such emotions and cycles through them so quickly it takes away depth from each individual phase. 'Peaceful to uncomfortable to sad and back to peace' If you want beauty you can either stay at Peaceful or Sad for the max expression but uncomfortable? Whats brughms doing? Music should not be uncomfortable (dissonance included) under the definition of music viz. 'vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) combined in such a way as to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion.' It's been a year and now, I'm not a fan of the whole sonata or the first movement. The second movement is the only one that I feel proud of praising due to its beauty. I don't mind changing my musical opinion, as long as it is parallel my definition of music, melodic and harmonic beauty, and makes me empathise. But you cannot be wrong, and nor can I, as we are discussing opinion against opinion, neither of which has a truth value. I used to like brughms, but i realised i couldnt find anything beautiful or emotionally moving or even interesting in his 'tadpoles on paper' and so left him. I'm quite a picky person musically, not liking most pieces after 1903 (dissonance), impressionism, overusage of percussion and brass, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Liszt, Wagner all on accounts of not being beautiful (many tell me that I do not know the difference between beauty and a bore, but beauty is subjective) though wagner and liszt are sometimes excempted, a lot of baroque music on the basis of rhythmic emphasis, most folk music, microtonal music, music from nearly any other part of the globe, etc. so ig this hate for brughms might have originated from these existing prejudices. -A Brughms hater
You know, it's funny, as much as you hate Bruhms I hate Liszt. His music is pure virtuosity that gets favored over any harmonic depth. And I absolutely adore Bruhms so I'm not even going to start a war. I'll just agree to disagree - Respectfully, a Liszt hater
![Edvard Grieg - Violin Sonata No. 3, Op. 45 [With score]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/iwTZoiRvp1U/mqdefault.jpg)
![Edvard Grieg - Violin Sonata No. 3, Op. 45 [With score]](/img/tr.png)
![KAYTRANADA - Witchy (feat. Childish Gambino) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jGK3YVmGZ3Y/mqdefault.jpg)
Here after a Korean drama use this piece in a scene, so sad that I've wait all my live to hear It, I'm completely in love now 💗💗💗
Have you watched the drama "do you like Brahms?"
@@tiarawidiastuti4756 yes!
Same here
Same!! 🤭
Same!
After watching do you like brahms ..it took my heart 😢😢😢
this is the greatest collab in history
Don't miss the first part by Dietrich - it's absolutely beautiful!
This calm, silent first dawn of autumn, my free and lonely soul flows through the melody.
Omg!!! Now I want to perform that sonata!!! It's amazing, full of intensity in the music 🎵 I just loved it!
You can hear Schumann's superiority miles away!
브람스를 좋아하세요는 3악장 14:20부터
That's what i play hihi
This piece is absolutely gorgeous.
Here after Do You Like Brahms.
Me too😏
Me too 😌
Robert Schumann-Johannes Brahms-Albert Dietrich:F-A-E Szonáta
1.Allegro (Albert Dietrich) 00:05
2.Intermezzo:Allegro,ma non troppo vivace (Robert Schumann) 11:55
3.Scherzo:Allegro (Johannes Brahms) 14:20
4.Finálé:Marcato, vivace mosso Tempo (Robert Schumann) 19:04
isabelle Faust-hegedű
Alexander Melnikov-zongora
Dávid Rehák
-- Excellent! Gracias from San Agustinillo !
Köszönöm az értékelést
Köszönöm az értékelést
@@steveegallo3384Köszönöm az értékelést
I have really waited for a sheet music video of this piece for a long time. Thanks
Very nice. Brahms/Schumann colab: how could not be. Intermezzo always stood out to me as special. Played as stand alone quite frequently. Thanks for posting.
Dietrich composed the first movement. It's a Dietrich/Schumann/Brahms collab
so happy to find interpretation which is not including Argerich, Garrett, Lang Lang or other showpuppets :-)
Do you like brahms brings me here
Me too 😊
Yes
Came here after finishing Do You Like Brahms?
same here
@@lydiahuangtw it was a good drama! Love it!
Its meeeee, i can't move on from the drama 😭😭😭
@@latinavaa i knowww.. they dimple couple were too sweet.. i’m getting withdrawal effect.
LOL
this is a brahms piece i actually like (sonatensatz)
브람스를 좋아하세요 보고 이까지 왔다....❤️
Ill-FAEtedly, you got to this before I did...
3/10
Proof that Schumann is under-rated and better than Brahms and many romantics in his time; Chopin, Liszt, Paganini, Verdi, Beethoven, Rossini and many others.
I'm here after to see: Do you like Brahms? ❤
Gotta say, I just love the first three movements of this piece.
The last one... is a Schumann finale. It's nice, but somehow kind of awkward. Still, his Intermezzo is lovely, so I can't hold it against him too much.
I get what you mean. Though, the ending of the fourth movement is among the most pure, most glorious and most marvelous finale ever written for the violin and piano!
@@aidentheabsurd I'm glad someone likes it, but I just don't see it. It just doesn't quite land for me.
드디어 좀 음악다운걸 올렸군
That's my score! 😄
14:20 for my use
I really don’t hear the F-A-E motif in the third movement. Does anyone know if the third movement has it or not?
I don't think it does explicitly. However, it repurposes the main theme from the first movement at 15:14, which contains elements of F-A-E. Furthermore, Brahms would go on to use the F-A-E motif at 12:03 in the third movement of his third piano sonata.
Same
It is not so immediately apparent where the F-A-E keys appear in the scherzo and the finale. Could someone point them out? It's quite transparent in the 1st and 2nd movements.
I don't know if it actually is in there, but I think that it hints to the Words "Frei aber Einsam", which means "Free but lonely"
I know the third movement pretty transparently references the first movement's main theme, but that's not based on FAE as far as I can tell either :/
The finale's first three chords are pretty transparently based on F, A, and E, though. It's an Faug6, Adim (though the E-flat is spelled as a D-sharp), and E7. The figure also appears at around 19:46.
Incidentally, I find it incredibly interesting that almost every appearance of FAE takes the lower A (i.e. goes down a sixth and then up a fifth, rather than up a third and then down a fourth). The upper A seems to me like the more obvious way of writing those three notes - though maybe that's why they chose not to do that.
based faust/melnikov
monosyllabic conversation no good
Vim pelo Dorama🇧🇷🥹
Pp1
Such a shame!! I love this sonata, I love Schumann and the first movement is my favourite, but as a Brahms hater, his Scherzo was indeed a joke, but not a funny joke, he just ruined my favourite sonata so I have to stick to a Schumann or Dvorak sonata. Disappointed in you Brahms. I cannot see anything worthy in the Scherzo, to me it's just a waste of 5 minutes. And to think that the 'great' Joachim only published that movement of the sonata! I find that utterly disgraceful, but the genius and beauty of Schumann and his pupil make up for it, or at least to an extent.
(expecting many dislikes, feel free to send them)
you can think of Brahms what you want...no one will care. But you should know that Schumann was more than impressed by him, saw in Brahms the new rising star on the european music horizone, before Brahms had even published one single piece of music.
@@sebribo1873 What makes you think that I do not know of Schumann's appreciation of Brahms? And what does that have to do with the controversy that I (may or may not) uphold? And, in continuation with the first point, I know of his (Schumann's) reverence towards Mendelssohn and Chopin and Mozart and Berlioz, and disagree with him such. I do have controversial musical opinions, and I do not care if nobody cares (or at least the general majority that does not choose to care so much as to reply). I'm not going to change this determination for the sake of a majority in the musical world! And when did I assert that my opinions were truths? When did I avoid room for disagreement?
Ending your short reply with Schumann's opinion of Brahms despite his compositional void is like saying that Schumann was impressed by Brahms but not as a composer, but as a hedgehog of a person (unlikely) or a piano virtuoso (of which I do to accept him but the stage of piano virtuosi was so great that it would not mean so much to be impressed by Brahms, especially when Clara Wiek was his (Schumann's) wife) but I find nothing of notice or of interest in Brahms. Why don't you try change my mind? Why do you like Brahms?
@@Deadbushfan1618 I have to disagree. Brahms was one of the greatest romantic era composers. his music has emotional depth and melodic richness, as seen in the poco allegretto from his 3rd symphony, and extremely refined craftsmanship, as seen in the intricate voicing from his intermezzos for piano (especially the a major and b-flat minor ones). His symphonic orchestration is immaculate. His 4th symphony shows his use of perfect blending of strings/woodwinds/brass to create a rich, lush sound. That symphony and his 1st symphony both show his mastery of contrapuntal writing as well, as they both have 4 and sometimes 5 layers of completely different material and yet it just works so well. As for the common critique that his music is too "academic"/dense, the "Brahms lullaby" and Brahm's Hungarian Dances completely disprove. They have some of the most catchy tunes of all of the romantic era. His chamber work is also crazy good. His b major piano trio is just *chefs kiss*. how can you not fall in love with the opening theme in the first movement. The third movement is so melancholic and one of the few movements in any piano trio that doesn't just double the violin and cello in octaves the whole time.
As for your critique on the Scherzo from the F-A-E sonata, you don't actually explain why it's bad. you just make empty insults like "a waste of 5 minutes". It's super energetic and very inventive. So many creative uses of the violin. For example, the figure from the 3rd measure is written in such a way that it will easily crescendo, reach a peak, and decrescendo all in one bow which perfectly matches the phrase. Also his Scherzo has the most interesting use of the F-A-E motif out of all the movements (not saying that the other movements are bad. I love the other movements too!). There are so many aspects of this movement that are indeed "worthy". The Trio section is so pretty. It goes from peaceful, to uncomfortable, to sad, and back to peace so seamlessly, so quickly.
- a brahms lover
@@kartikpatri1142 Note: I'm not going to write 'in my opinion' after everything I say to increase readability of this response: Emotional Depth and melodic richness do not exist in the noise of brughms. His life had no good emotions to express in his music and he was not a melodist. Perhaps his symphonic arrangements are 'intentional' but even Handel was a greater mind at effects. I remember when i listened to Brughms's b major piano trio the first time... nothing special. Second time, headache. *Chef's kiss* Who doesnt like a porcupine? That piano trio is nothing compared to the Tchaikovsky, Schumann, Dobrzynski, Beethoven, Haydn, Dvorak, or perhaps going into the niche category, Beriot, Reinecke, R Franck, C Franck Borodin, Hurlstone, Alyabyev, Gade, etc. ones for the reason of beauty, melodic and expressive. Want counterpoint? Renaissance and Baroque are at your disposal. You also get spirituality, which bruhgms lacks. The Hungarian dances are frankly disgusting. They may be 'catchy' to some philistines or the general public but it reeks of uncivilised, likely disruptive, crude, folk environments (not that I believe in this stereotype of country civilisation, just the pub feel). Catchyness is based on rhythm mainly (I think with inductive reasoning) so this does not show any beauty. How come Liszt got in trouble for his hungarian raphsody and brughms didn't?!?
I agree with you, the year-old comment was phrased rather badly. However, many of these are in my nature; nonetheless I will elaborate here. The opening bars have no melody, with the piano (paino in this circumstance) finally introducing movement but into a place of insanity. The use of thirds and the violin g string so sharply creates a feel of 'cool' to some people, but I would compare this to the 'music' (noise) of our day, where rhythmic emphasis is used to attract 'views' (or listens? irdk) Therefore the violin is turned into a percussion instrument, not only torture for the instrument but for the ears of the audience. Creative use of violin? The g string can be deep and moving, but to use it sharply is not the way to go. Crescendo and decrescendo in one bow is merely elementary. Furthermore, technique can allow the same effect in TWO bows without transition such that it flows. If you want violin innovation that doesnt make violin a percussion instrument, try ernst, paganini, saint lubin, lipinski, slavik, etc. that can turn a violin into a woodwind among other things. What brughms did is not innovation and nor is it rare as many musical performers do such things with notes (no doubt that you have noticed that before)The trio section is boring quite simply. Even if it has such emotions and cycles through them so quickly it takes away depth from each individual phase. 'Peaceful to uncomfortable to sad and back to peace' If you want beauty you can either stay at Peaceful or Sad for the max expression but uncomfortable? Whats brughms doing? Music should not be uncomfortable (dissonance included) under the definition of music viz. 'vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) combined in such a way as to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion.'
It's been a year and now, I'm not a fan of the whole sonata or the first movement. The second movement is the only one that I feel proud of praising due to its beauty. I don't mind changing my musical opinion, as long as it is parallel my definition of music, melodic and harmonic beauty, and makes me empathise. But you cannot be wrong, and nor can I, as we are discussing opinion against opinion, neither of which has a truth value. I used to like brughms, but i realised i couldnt find anything beautiful or emotionally moving or even interesting in his 'tadpoles on paper' and so left him. I'm quite a picky person musically, not liking most pieces after 1903 (dissonance), impressionism, overusage of percussion and brass, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Liszt, Wagner all on accounts of not being beautiful (many tell me that I do not know the difference between beauty and a bore, but beauty is subjective) though wagner and liszt are sometimes excempted, a lot of baroque music on the basis of rhythmic emphasis, most folk music, microtonal music, music from nearly any other part of the globe, etc. so ig this hate for brughms might have originated from these existing prejudices.
-A Brughms hater
You know, it's funny, as much as you hate Bruhms I hate Liszt. His music is pure virtuosity that gets favored over any harmonic depth. And I absolutely adore Bruhms so I'm not even going to start a war. I'll just agree to disagree
- Respectfully, a Liszt hater
incompetent composer collab!
Robert Schumann-Johannes Brahms-Albert Dietrich:F-A-E Szonáta
1.Allegro (Albert Dietrich) 00:05
2.Intermezzo:Allegro,ma non troppo vivace (Robert Schumann) 11:55
3.Scherzo:Allegro (Johannes Brahms) 14:20
4.Finálé:Marcato, vivace mosso Tempo (Robert Schumann) 19:04
isabelle Faust-hegedű
Alexander Melnikov-zongora