@@hawkbirdtree3660 it's interesting to think that one could cultivate a novel harmonic language from a fairly conservative composer who was inspired by Classical Germanic music-writing.
Schoenberg did write an essay entitled Brahms The Progressive. And at a glance even his most “advanced” (atonal) scores have a Brahmsian appearance (not sound, of course).
Beautiful. It's actually Schoenberg's post-romantic / free atonal work I find most difficult to appreciate. Once he goes full twelve-tone, I think he's a genius.
Very interesting how he notated the first piece that could easily be notated as 3/8 in 2/4. Edit: I just listened to the whole thing again, and I now realise the whole piece can’t just be rewritten in 3/8; truly interesting metric modulations here and there.
Oui, vous avez raison. Quel dommage qu'il n'ait pas continué dans la même veine. Par euphémisme, je dirais que je suis moins sensible aux pièces qui ont suivi. En fait, je n'aime pas du tout, cela me rapelle la "musique" que mon chat faisait quand il montait sur le piano...
Wasnt big on Schoenberg until I assisted to a masterclass/class about op 19. There are definitely some beautiful moments in this. Then again I'm still not big on him but at least I like op11 and 19 now. Lol
This is a treasure to have on RUclips. Thank you. And what a pianist! Have just listened through the first of the op. 11 pieces-the phrasing, the variations in tempo, the incredible articulation. I cannot wait to hear the rest.
Op 25 is the best example of this stuff. It's clear and concise. Gould gets a ton of expression out of it also. Everyone misses the mark except Gould actually
That's why Schönberg went atonal... What else were to be written with harmonic tonality? How could an artist find his own idiom within the tonal alphabet? He had the necessary authority to undergo his musical adventures, since he mastered everything in music until then. He were highly esteemed by Mahler and Strauss, and taken by the public as their successors on german music tradition, but he must have felt something like "everything I conceive in this system was already done or, at least, resembles someone's else work".
I think composers like Arvo Pärt, John Adams, and Philip Glass found the answer to “what else were to be written with harmonic tonality?” Many of their works are well within the boundary of tonality, and yet I find them stunningly original. Schönberg’s music is original in an entirely different way.
@@bennyksmusicalworld Take note that you mentioned composers of after the mid 20th century, and they didn't expanded the tonal realm at all. I think that Jazz was the real next step for tonality. After so much noise was made since Schönberg, I think it was natural that the pendulum started to shift. But those tonal composers, some referred to as "minimalists", coexisted with still a lot of more or less noisy stuff, like Stockhausen, Xenakis, Beat Furrer, John Cage. Now we live in a wonderful time when everything can be music, to the point where we could not use the term "music" but "art of sounds". I thank all those composers, specially including the most unappealing to the ears, because they went to a path thank, thank goodness, we don't need to go to.
@@m.a.g.3920 Well, modes are the musical raw material of plainchant and renaissance, and they have been on the repertoire ever since. Anyways, modes are tonal. They have a tonal center and dominant pitches.
Schonberg ha sbagliato completamente il modo di scrivere la partitura. La prima nota da un ottavo andava chiaramente scritta in levare. 😛Solo così gli accenti potrebbero avere un senso.
I have listened and studied Schoenberg for over 50 years and always come to the same conclusion. He was a bad composer. He was all head, with a heart that could only express itself through the filter of his intellect. Like Czerny, Burgemuller, and Hummel he was too much captured by the spirit of his time and the pedantry of his technical innovations to allow for the creation of something with more eternal appeal. After 100 years the fad of pantonality has died a thousand times, and Schoenberg is revealed, not as a great innovator, but simply as a mediocrity, a bad composer. 56:43
![Rachmaninoff - Piano Concerto No. 3, Op. 30 [Yunchan Lim] (Boston 2024, Ossia Cadenza)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0CKhq_yln1Y/mqdefault.jpg)
The first set of pieces reminds me of Brahms.
Funny you say that because Brahms was the inspiration for Schoenberg’s adoption of atonality; not Wagner
@@hawkbirdtree3660 it's interesting to think that one could cultivate a novel harmonic language from a fairly conservative composer who was inspired by Classical Germanic music-writing.
Or Reger, he was a great fan of.
Schoenberg did write an essay entitled Brahms The Progressive. And at a glance even his most “advanced” (atonal) scores have a Brahmsian appearance (not sound, of course).
Beautiful. It's actually Schoenberg's post-romantic / free atonal work I find most difficult to appreciate. Once he goes full twelve-tone, I think he's a genius.
Very interesting how he notated the first piece that could easily be notated as 3/8 in 2/4.
Edit: I just listened to the whole thing again, and I now realise the whole piece can’t just be rewritten in 3/8; truly interesting metric modulations here and there.
clear that he was influenced by Brahms.
Right except Brahms would have written it in 3/8 and then changed the time signatures when appropriate
Wow....the early pieces are nice on the ears. Webern's early music is too.
The later ones are too, at least to my ears.
@@KingstonCzajkowski I don't hate them as badly as I did when I was younger
His early pieces are sooooo beautiful!
Oui, vous avez raison. Quel dommage qu'il n'ait pas continué dans la même veine. Par euphémisme, je dirais que je suis moins sensible aux pièces qui ont suivi. En fait, je n'aime pas du tout, cela me rapelle la "musique" que mon chat faisait quand il montait sur le piano...
@@patrickgrandin497 wtf you. Say 😮
Only the early pieces? ahahahaaa
Started (never finished) learning Opus 11 many years ago. Very beautiful and haunting piece and played so well here.
It's totally worth playing, even if sight-playing!
Wow, I wasn't expecting the first one.
Very good and fantastic pieces.
Wasnt big on Schoenberg until I assisted to a masterclass/class about op 19. There are definitely some beautiful moments in this. Then again I'm still not big on him but at least I like op11 and 19 now. Lol
It's amazing seeing the progression. Thanks for the upload.
This is a treasure to have on RUclips. Thank you. And what a pianist! Have just listened through the first of the op. 11 pieces-the phrasing, the variations in tempo, the incredible articulation. I cannot wait to hear the rest.
Op 25 is the best example of this stuff. It's clear and concise. Gould gets a ton of expression out of it also. Everyone misses the mark except Gould actually
Un' ottima esecuzione ❤️
Delicious. Thank you!!
danke
Gorgeous!
❤️🎼♥️🎹❤️
Muchas gracias por compartir!!!!!!
Bravooooooooooooo
Una obra maravillosa.
"My music isn't revolutionary, just badly played..." -Schönberg ❤
BASED
BASED
FUCK YEAH
Nice compliation. I wish it wasn't records of the just one performer, i would like to see gould, gieseking or vedernikov etc
sodelicious...........................................
Alguien podría hablar sobre la dedicatoria del I. Andanino?
I primi tre brani piacevoli(1894).Ma dopo cos'è ha preso un ictus? Poveretto roba inascoltabile spacciata per evoluzione musicale.
Atonal moment
That's why Schönberg went atonal... What else were to be written with harmonic tonality? How could an artist find his own idiom within the tonal alphabet? He had the necessary authority to undergo his musical adventures, since he mastered everything in music until then. He were highly esteemed by Mahler and Strauss, and taken by the public as their successors on german music tradition, but he must have felt something like "everything I conceive in this system was already done or, at least, resembles someone's else work".
I think composers like Arvo Pärt, John Adams, and Philip Glass found the answer to “what else were to be written with harmonic tonality?” Many of their works are well within the boundary of tonality, and yet I find them stunningly original. Schönberg’s music is original in an entirely different way.
@@bennyksmusicalworld Take note that you mentioned composers of after the mid 20th century, and they didn't expanded the tonal realm at all. I think that Jazz was the real next step for tonality. After so much noise was made since Schönberg, I think it was natural that the pendulum started to shift. But those tonal composers, some referred to as "minimalists", coexisted with still a lot of more or less noisy stuff, like Stockhausen, Xenakis, Beat Furrer, John Cage. Now we live in a wonderful time when everything can be music, to the point where we could not use the term "music" but "art of sounds". I thank all those composers, specially including the most unappealing to the ears, because they went to a path thank, thank goodness, we don't need to go to.
Not true, the modal possibilities are infinite, mixing modes like Debussy or Coltrane.
@@bennyksmusicalworldTerry Riley, LaMonte Young, Steve Reich or Charlemagne Palestine are much more interesting than Glass!
@@m.a.g.3920 Well, modes are the musical raw material of plainchant and renaissance, and they have been on the repertoire ever since. Anyways, modes are tonal. They have a tonal center and dominant pitches.
😭
His best piano work is actually his concerto in C.
도대체 무슨 일이 있었던 거지 쇤베르그에게...
AtonalFun
damn the second set literally gives me a fever and instant depression
urgh
The earlier stuff is cheesy romanticism. From 1903 on it gets better.
Schonberg ha sbagliato completamente il modo di scrivere la partitura. La prima nota da un ottavo andava chiaramente scritta in levare. 😛Solo così gli accenti potrebbero avere un senso.
His early music is beautiful! The later 12 tone stuff does nothing for me. In fact I find it ugly and boring.
Me too
Think it’s a very real read of 🎉an interest
composition Thanks so much…..
I change my mind, wow
Schönebergian early style is wonderful, the rest is unlistenable.
For me his early style is just some generic piano piece
I have listened and studied Schoenberg for over 50 years and always come to the same conclusion. He was a bad composer. He was all head, with a heart that could only express itself through the filter of his intellect. Like Czerny, Burgemuller, and Hummel he was too much captured by the spirit of his time and the pedantry of his technical innovations to allow for the creation of something with more eternal appeal. After 100 years the fad of pantonality has died a thousand times, and Schoenberg is revealed, not as a great innovator, but simply as a mediocrity, a bad composer.
56:43
his music is complete garbage
no u
Funny how he went from writing good stuff to absolute garbage