Eine tolle Musik, die heute fast niemand mehr kennt. Schade, dass man Ries' Werke quasi nie in Konzerten hört. Das 19. Jhdt. hat noch so viele musikalische Schätze zu bieten, die darauf warten entdeckt zu werden!
Once again magnificent chamber music of Riess, beautiful quintet. The discussion of he is a genius or not is indeed superfluous. He wrote much marvelous music.
Of course, Ries was not a genius, but was neither a negligible composer, which would be hard when you are a good musician everyday in close contact with Beethoven! The genuis cannot be transmitted, but a good composer can take great lessons in this situation. Ries deserves to be listened. One again, it is not a genius, but the influence of Beethoven, fully adapted to his great talent, can be heard at each moment in his works. In this quintet, the piano part is mot often prominent on the strings (a bit like in Haydn's trois), which is undesrtandable from a pianist composer: Beethoven somr etimes asked him to play for him, which evidences his virtuoso and musical skills. This make this work full of interest, as many other Ries' large works.. Thank you, Bartje Bartmans !
Does it matter if he is a genius or not? He was at the least a more than competent composer who knew how to orchestrate and was a formidable pianist, one of the greats of his days. The fact that he was a life long friend of Beethoven says it all to me. He even wrote an opera, Die Räuberbraut, which was a sensation at the premiere. Later it was given favorable receptions in Amsterdam, London and Paris. Now can we say that about Hummel? Chopin? Schumann? Mendelssohn thought highly of this work and thanks to him we know that Goethe loved the music (NOT the libretto) As a matter of fact this is the one place where he topped Beethoven as Fidelio was not exactly a sensation when it came out. If you look at his catalogue of works you will notice what a rich library it is for flute, clarinet, harp and french horn. He wrote cello sonatas and about 22 violin sonatas which he played himself, simply switched parts with an accompanist. Who besides Mozart and Bach could do that?
To develop this amount of skill in composing takes staggering intellect, decades of study, and dedication to one's craft. Who are you to judge the intellect of a man who was as famous as Beethoven in his lifetime? Beethoven was an equal to Ries in his day, it's only through the lens of history has Beethoven been chosen as the "greater", first from his innovative composing, and then from name recognition. But that isn't to say that Beethoven was smarter, he just had a different style which turned out to be much more relevant in the path of music history. They were contemparies of each other, and should be viewed as equals in terms of their intellect and dedication to the craft; even if Beethoven turned out to be the more important/well known composing in 2020 hindsight.
The problem with this kind of answer is that they are based on what these people have been told in school or music schools, where they don't study anything but the standard (limited) repertoire and within that, they only focus on 2-3 pieces in a myopic way and deem uninteresting or not adequate anything else. That's why then you get "oh this piece is nice but it lacks the genius because of this and that and it will never reach the height of that X composer because he was just a craftsman". I find it offensive to the composer itself, to the people that thought the composer in question (as in any composer) was a good or great one, and to even the "great composer" that thought that his colleague was equivalent to him. Point is, you can show them 1000000 papers that state the validity of these forgotten composers, show on paper how the composition itself is equivalent in beauty, intricacy, innovation etc, but the answer will always be "yeah but he's not him"...
@@gregoryborton6598 That is complete nonsense. Ries was never became anywhere near as famous as Beethoven in his life, and epsecially not during Beethoven's life, when he was still his student. Where did you get that information from? Furthermore, the fact that Beethoven's music is better than Ries' has absolutely zero to do with historical perception, the "path of music history", name recognition or any such nonsense. It is simply better music. Orders of magnitude better. Doesn't mean Ries was a bad composer at all though, he was still great.
@@GuglielmoEsposito Can you provide, if not 1000000, then perhaps just a single paper that shows on paper how some composition "is equivalent in beauty, intricacy, innovation etc" to another composition? Because I'm pretty sure none such exist.
Right, written to showcase himself at special events in local houses. No need for a whole orchestra. The acc. had to be such local musicians could learn it quickly or even better, sightread it on the spot. Most chamber music with piano served that purpose, this was common practice for the day.
This music played better than it actualy is . I kept waiting for sometthing to happen . Its for the no minds and non-musical ears of the aristocracy . Did Ries do anything worthwhile ? I compose too so I know what I'm looking at : I bet Beethoven thought nothing of this music : maybe it was only for consumption . If there is a symphony or anything by this man tat rises above discreet chatter I'd like to hear or view it . There's enough Beethoven to grow with so it isn't necessary .
@@bartjebartmans If the ears of the aristocracy in Ries' time were unskilled what to say about the ears of today's mass public who know how to appreciate silly pop music that repeats endlessly the same boring clichés since at least 75 years now ?
@@christianwouters6764 The ears of the aristocracy were NOT unskilled. Many of them played instruments themselves and everybody, EVERYBODY could dance. Check the amount of princes, princesses who composed, or who supported the arts.
@@bartjebartmans You are right. Today's aristocracy is unskilled, invites pop stars and soccer players instead of real artists and scientists. This is what the French Revolution has brought us.
Eine tolle Musik, die heute fast niemand mehr kennt. Schade, dass man Ries' Werke quasi nie in Konzerten hört. Das 19. Jhdt. hat noch so viele musikalische Schätze zu bieten, die darauf warten entdeckt zu werden!
Once again magnificent chamber music of Riess, beautiful quintet. The discussion of he is a genius or not is indeed superfluous. He wrote much marvelous music.
Extraordinary soft sound!
Another fine addition to my collection
Ferdinand Ries - Piano Quintet in B minor, Op. 74
1. - Grave - Allegro con brio: 0:00
2. - Larghetto: 9:37
3. - Rondo: Allegro: 14:36
Brilliant!
Gorgeous!
The best pianist I've heard since Anna Maria.
¡¡HERMOSO!!
It's amazing!
More by Ries please!
Of course, Ries was not a genius, but was neither a negligible composer, which would be hard when you are a good musician everyday in close contact with Beethoven! The genuis cannot be transmitted, but a good composer can take great lessons in this situation. Ries deserves to be listened. One again, it is not a genius, but the influence of Beethoven, fully adapted to his great talent, can be heard at each moment in his works. In this quintet, the piano part is mot often prominent on the strings (a bit like in Haydn's trois), which is undesrtandable from a pianist composer: Beethoven somr etimes asked him to play for him, which evidences his virtuoso and musical skills. This make this work full of interest, as many other Ries' large works.. Thank you,
Bartje Bartmans !
Does it matter if he is a genius or not? He was at the least a more than competent composer who knew how to orchestrate and was a formidable pianist, one of the greats of his days. The fact that he was a life long friend of Beethoven says it all to me. He even wrote an opera, Die Räuberbraut, which was a sensation at the premiere. Later it was given favorable receptions in Amsterdam, London and Paris. Now can we say that about Hummel? Chopin? Schumann? Mendelssohn thought highly of this work and thanks to him we know that Goethe loved the music (NOT the libretto) As a matter of fact this is the one place where he topped Beethoven as Fidelio was not exactly a sensation when it came out. If you look at his catalogue of works you will notice what a rich library it is for flute, clarinet, harp and french horn. He wrote cello sonatas and about 22 violin sonatas which he played himself, simply switched parts with an accompanist. Who besides Mozart and Bach could do that?
To develop this amount of skill in composing takes staggering intellect, decades of study, and dedication to one's craft.
Who are you to judge the intellect of a man who was as famous as Beethoven in his lifetime? Beethoven was an equal to Ries in his day, it's only through the lens of history has Beethoven been chosen as the "greater", first from his innovative composing, and then from name recognition. But that isn't to say that Beethoven was smarter, he just had a different style which turned out to be much more relevant in the path of music history. They were contemparies of each other, and should be viewed as equals in terms of their intellect and dedication to the craft; even if Beethoven turned out to be the more important/well known composing in 2020 hindsight.
The problem with this kind of answer is that they are based on what these people have been told in school or music schools, where they don't study anything but the standard (limited) repertoire and within that, they only focus on 2-3 pieces in a myopic way and deem uninteresting or not adequate anything else. That's why then you get "oh this piece is nice but it lacks the genius because of this and that and it will never reach the height of that X composer because he was just a craftsman". I find it offensive to the composer itself, to the people that thought the composer in question (as in any composer) was a good or great one, and to even the "great composer" that thought that his colleague was equivalent to him.
Point is, you can show them 1000000 papers that state the validity of these forgotten composers, show on paper how the composition itself is equivalent in beauty, intricacy, innovation etc, but the answer will always be "yeah but he's not him"...
@@gregoryborton6598 That is complete nonsense. Ries was never became anywhere near as famous as Beethoven in his life, and epsecially not during Beethoven's life, when he was still his student. Where did you get that information from? Furthermore, the fact that Beethoven's music is better than Ries' has absolutely zero to do with historical perception, the "path of music history", name recognition or any such nonsense. It is simply better music. Orders of magnitude better. Doesn't mean Ries was a bad composer at all though, he was still great.
@@GuglielmoEsposito Can you provide, if not 1000000, then perhaps just a single paper that shows on paper how some composition "is equivalent in beauty, intricacy, innovation etc" to another composition? Because I'm pretty sure none such exist.
What's with these beethoven purists? xd
More like a piano concerto with an accompaniment of a string trio
Right, written to showcase himself at special events in local houses. No need for a whole orchestra. The acc. had to be such local musicians could learn it quickly or even better, sightread it on the spot. Most chamber music with piano served that purpose, this was common practice for the day.
This music played better than it actualy is . I kept waiting for sometthing to happen . Its for the no minds and non-musical ears of the aristocracy . Did Ries do anything worthwhile ? I compose too so I know what I'm looking at : I bet Beethoven thought nothing of this music : maybe it was only for consumption . If there is a symphony or anything by this man tat rises above discreet chatter I'd like to hear or view it . There's enough Beethoven to grow with so it isn't necessary .
Your comment is also not necessary, just chattering complaints about nothing.
@@bartjebartmans If the ears of the aristocracy in Ries' time were unskilled what to say about the ears of today's mass public who know how to appreciate silly pop music that repeats endlessly the same boring clichés since at least 75 years now ?
@@christianwouters6764 The ears of the aristocracy were NOT unskilled. Many of them played instruments themselves and everybody, EVERYBODY could dance. Check the amount of princes, princesses who composed, or who supported the arts.
@@bartjebartmans You are right. Today's aristocracy is unskilled, invites pop stars and soccer players instead of real artists and scientists. This is what the French Revolution has brought us.
Beautiful!