This is one of my favorite 12-tone compositions, and one of Schoenberg's finest late works. It has both the disquiet of much of his post-late Romantic compositions, and yet tremendous lyricism approaching tonality. In addition to Uchida, one of the best with this repertoire, I recommend the recording with Alfred Brendel performing this superbly.
complex rhythms. what i like about this is it doesn't carry any dogma with it; it feels organic, an marsh excursion in the dark. the voices challenge one another, the melody bumps and starts.
Kudos also to the Director of Photography, who was obviously following the score and had cameras ready to grab the various sections of the orchestra as they were featured.
Gotta love Schoenberg... love him or hate him, when it's well played his music is expressive and it makes you think, feel and react. That fact alone I think validates his music as art.
A lot of people find this to be unlistenable, wretched music, which is what makes atonality so controversial. I love it though. It's uncomfortable but it's wonderfully bizarre.
If you hear the beginning of this piece and hate it, stop listening to it and go listen to something your mind can comprehend. But if you've fallen in love with the sound and admire its complexity, you should agree, this is magnificent.
Before Gutenberg, most of the stories people knew were designed to be memorized almost word for word. Structure was essential so the brain could hold on to verbal patterns and common themes. If you gathered a crowd and spoke with verbal austerity or told a story with an abridged/ambiguous ending, you would lose them or be stiffed. I think people have a deep urge to admire patterns rather than interpret something unfamiliar, regardless of "content". Even frivolous patterns are loved: Escher.
Mitsuko Uchida is IMHO the best piano player for this piano concerto. You can hear, that it's in the tradition of late romanticsm - so melodic. I just love it 🙂
I keep coming back to her interpretation of this piece again and again. I love it. To the person who thinks that "Verklärte Nacht" is Schoenberg's only "genuine music," if you're a fan of that, then you should hear his tone poem "Pelleas und Melisande" and his large orchestral piece, "Gurrelieder," which is one of the lushest late Romantic pieces of its era. The "Song of the Waldtaube" (Wood Dove) is quite famous as a stand-alone piece.
I'll have to dig up my old research for their logic behind it, but in counterpoint texts the fifth and octave are described as "perfect" consonances -the earliest departure from plainchant depended entirely on these intervals- while the third and sixth are called "imperfect."
The perfect mix of jazz rhythms and the impeccable beauty of twelve tone. There is a large difference between atonality and "out of harmony." They are in harmony, in fact, twelve tone is a lot more structured and "correct" than traditional 7 tone scales based on a tonic. I can not believe that people are calling this "terrible to listen to." This is tame atonal, in fact, it's structured, it has themes, it's "music." go listen to String Quartet 2 or Cello Concerto 1 by Pendereski.
this song gives me an image in my mind of kids playing...its like the child's imagination coming out to play. and really, in this video, we see a bunch of big kids playing with their instruments. i dont mean this in any negative way, shape or form...its just what i place schoenberg's music under...Compositions by children. its sooo amazing.
It is a bummer there's still people who are bothered enough to tell others they know what music actually is or isn't. I mean, there are even professional philosophers out there who attempt to justify their aesthetic preference for tonal music by saying atonal music really doesn't qualify as properly musical (Raffman). It's obvious to me this type of music should not be listened to in the same way as tonal music. It does not engender the same sort of musical sensations as tonal music; they are different sensations, not subordinate. It isn't just a mere intellectual sort of appreciation, but neither is it the same sort of listening you'd do for Beethoven. It's like learning a different language.
houses of the homo It shouldn’t be listened to at all. It’s simply garbage noise, and nothing - including the way one listens to it - can rectify that.
@@Mike-pf1ru You can't go about thinking it's all just random crap, like a bunch of random numbers, or like digits of pi from 29,023 to 29,555. If you listen to it with that mindset that's all you'll hear. Listen to it as Schoenberg trying to make order out of nonsense--like how the existentialists, such as Camus or Heidegger, argued that what fundamentally makes us human beings is that we strive to make our own meaning out of an absurd world--or fall into angst and thoughtlessness if we fail or refuse to try.
I actually really love this music, if it's put together the right way. Schoenberg has a nice way of orchestrating it. It almost doesn't even sound random because each instrument seems to speak at just the right moment.
It's weird, but for some reason I kind of dig this stuff. It makes me uncomfortable, then I realize that it's supposed to. Music evokes emotions, so as a change from the usual "sublime, beauty, tragic, angry, aloof, etc" music it's kind of novel.
II think the comments on this page truly demonstrate that if you don't understand the piece the instant you begin hearing it, insult it. This is atonal, yes, but based on a tone row that ensures stability. This isn't random note pressing, this isn't even cluster chords. It's a set row and variances on that row. It even has a repeating theme and structure. It's beautiful. If twelve tone wasn't a great creation, Stravinsky, Weber, etc wouldn't have picked it up for their own uses.
This has got me totally captivated. I had only heard Schonberg's Pierre Lunaire and wasn't too impressed, but THIS is impressive. I'm gonna buy this concert immediatly!!!
"Actually sod it, just make music, sod this cerebral unpicking of things" I agree, let composers write the music they want in the way the want. Music isn't about methods or a technique, it's about emotions, thoughts,...
It is more structurally perfect than the 7 tonal system. The structure behind twelve tone not only controls pitches being played, but the order in which they're played, unlike the 7 tone system, which only has "suggestions" for chord progressions. To correct this, we have structure forms, like the rondo, which in time were also cast aside because they're additive. Note pattern is written INTO 12 tone, it's beautiful and complex. Hard to understand, yes, and I get your point, but still.
Nature has been described as complex and wild, with no structure and seeming chaos. Yet zoom in, and notice ecosystems, and leaves, and the structures of nature--it has footwork. I feel that 12 tone is similar; it is chaotic and unpleasant at times, but zoom in and you notice the structure behind it, it only looks and feels free and wild. In that aspect I sometimes consider 12 tone the music to most accurately portray nature, not in actual sounds of nature, but in the nature of nature.
Love this concerto. First heard it when I was 13 or so (Roger Woodward, Proms). It's tonal and atonal at the same time, like Berg's Violin Concerto. After a few listenings, this is not difficult music to follow. The dissonances are not ugly, quite the opposite in fact. I've never understood why there are so few performances of this concerto. Mitsuko Uchida plays brilliantly. From her interviews it's clear she loves this piece. Would love to hear the rest of this performance !
@sybo59 Yes, of course - because 'agreeability' is the obvious quality by which we should judge the value of all music. Let's not concern ourselves with the reality that the music by many visionary Romantic composers (and even earlier) was also considered 'incomprehensible' or 'ugly' by their contemporaries. It's clearly a matter of historical perspective. I also love your it's "ugly BECAUSE it is ugly" line of reasoning. Circular logic always works, because it's 'circular' and 'logical'.
12 лет назад
@lefthandovRA Kant said there are two things that don't need any reason at all, those are music and laughter. Sigmund Freud once said "Sometimes music is just music".
Music is more than a purely academic exercise, and should be analyzed as such. Knowing all the rules and how to use them does not make one a great composer, it makes their music formulaic. Music theory forms a basis for music but true musical exploration transcends the its rational and logical guidelines.
A more modern form of this music is industrial music. It came around in the 70's as a post-punk, art rock movement. Anyone who likes this can find a subtle interest in industrial music. I suggest starting with Throbbing Gristle.
For those who may have difficulty, please allow me to advise that you listen carefully to the opening theme, which has the character of a Ländler. Everything that comes after the complete statement of this theme is a variation on the opening motif or some other aspect of that theme. It is precisely the same compositional procedure used by Brahms or Beethoven. The only difference is the total chromaticism of the musical language.
you can't compare this kind of music, with rock music, they are both at opossite sites. The rock is melodic, but this music, has transcend the melody, and has an atonal way. With the twleve note composition. So i could tell that Schoenberg is a lot more modern than any kind of rock, in content, and in technique.
He’s taking a new set set of rules and within those rules he’s creating a crafted tidy piece that treats each note as important and not used to support or lead or deliver but rather to be emancipated from those sorts of tasks so that all are equal to the tonic’s purpose-genius.
I think the fourth is special because the note on the top can steal the tonic property to the bottom note and become itself a tonic, and vice versa, it's not as clear as with a fifth when the bottom note clearly feels as the tonic no matter what I think many considerations are about this rather than about a dissonance in the intervall
@ Saremo I agree with you If you focus so much of what music "has to be" you lose the very mysterious nature of what music is. I have really learned to expand my appreciation of music and sound because great musicians like Schoenberg test the norm of how people interpret music. I would of never liked bands like Skinny Puppy, Venetian Snares, Autechre, Mr.Bungle or Devo if I confined myself to listening to music from 1 perspective.
Schoenberg has a certain 'je ne sais quoi' without doubt, but life is short and I have to delve into Bach more and more as his patterns and strange loops engulf me with the desire to see "the thing" again and again.
@sybo59 To me, the only thing that can possibly redeem atonality or noise is an attachment to some form of "program." So then, do you have more sympathy for Moses und Aron, Periot Lunaire, A Survivor from Warsaw, or the dramatic works of Berg, etc.? If so, we have at least some common ground, as those happen to be the atonal works I hold in highest regard.
man, the grudge is a pretty incredible pianist. this really sounds like three pieces of music playing at the same time. i'm amazed there isn't much, if any dissonance in the orchestra itself, but overall, not something i'd ever pay to listen to.
I don't mind Schoenberg. I don't listen to him unless I have to, mind you, but I can at least say that I appreciate what he was trying to accomplish. The man was a genius. That being said, I find comparisons between Schoenberg and Beethoven laughable, and find the idea that atonal music would ever replace tonal music, which Schoenberg believed at one point, downright hilarious. We are hardwired to prefer tonal music in the same way that apples are more appetizing to us than rocks.
If you like this, I recommend Schoenberg's Violin Concerto and his Variations for Orchestra. Also, look into Alban Berg's Violin Concerto, and Bela Bartok's music. I think classical music of the last century could really speak to contemporary audiences, even those not particularly familiar with classical music. Enjoy!
A lot of bullshits about Schoenberg are written in the commentaries. But that isn't important.What is important is Miss Uchida one of the most important pianists of our time. She is specialist in Mozart, Schubert , Debussy , Schoenberg and Beethoven . The record of Uchida with this concert with Boulez is by far the best version of this beautiful music. I regret that the majority of the people stopped at the 19 Century.The Concerto opus 42 is a masterwork. Miss Uchida proves this.
In that case, Schoenberg is for you. It is completely structured on the tone row and twelve tones, complete with odd rhythms and key signatures. He has devices to help solve tone row "schematics" which were pretty much calculators. This music is scientific, yet still carries a seemingly too free atonality.
@cnabaie "you probably percieved it to be ugly too" There is a huge difference between a challenging piece that may grow on you, a piece you can appreciate but don't personally enjoy, and music that is devoid of content BY DESIGN. The Weimar Expressionist movement and Dada epitomize the latter; and people that begin to take a mockery serious epitomize pretentiousness.
@anutter14ever i do believe,perhaps wrong,this "adorno",is only known to us that research music,he ridiculed hindemith,whose music is still now performed,some seventy years later,and has a RESURGENCE in europe and america,in munich when i last visited they did CARDILLAC in the famous curvelles theatre in the munich residence to packed audiences,i even bought the CD,it is magnificent,i say again,WHERE,AND WHO IS THE ADORNO,A DUST MITE IN HISTORY WHILE GREAT MUSIC LIVES ON.
Of course, because last 50 years most jazz musicians use harmonies and progressions that were used commonly by impressionist classical composers in late 19th century till middle 20th century. Take every impressionist composition and give slow swing rhytm and you will get a modern ’jazz’ composition. And many famous “jazz“ musicians like Bill Evans, Keith Jarrett, Chick Corea, Oscar Peterson, Duke Ellington were classicaly trained. They used a lot of classical music. And don’t forget that jazz music started like brass music based on march compositions by classical composers.
@PianoGod1990 Good question. When I compose the first thing I do is grasp and attach myself to something that has a very obvious pattern which I know will satisfy many listeners. But I find myself disatisfied because it doesn't feel innovative to go for the very obvious pattern. But then I try something a little more innovative, perhaps too innovative, and I feel equally disatisfied because it's not so easy to listen to, which makes me feel like it's not good music.
@ninjapunk76 His music, as Schoenberg himself put it, "treats dissonances like consonances" and represents the "emancipation of the dissonance." As I said, he was DELIBERATELY incomprehensible. In its time, this genre's admirers praised it for not being beautiful, but "profound." Profound because it was ugly. Shoe goes on [1924]: "I cannot be understood, and I content myself with respect." Wow, it's almost as if I didn't base my statement on "historical perspective" at all!
@J4m3z1 Fair enough; I was just curious. Though we disagree on the main point, I believe we both recognize that the choice between either knowledge or happiness is a fatuous and artificial one. Reason is practical by its nature, but isn't good BECAUSE it is practical (ie. pragmatism). Have a good one!
Strangely, i gind myself warming up to this music evry time i listen to it, though i still find tonality much more satisfying in terms of my own writing. atonality will rarely give that shiver down the spine that tonal music can deliver... Oh well.
If the audience appreciates what is being played then so be it. Those with an actual neural disconnection between harmony and emotion might enjoy it on the level of texture and rhythm. Those with an approval reflex for anything touted by fringe anarchist-artists can continue to force themselves to enjoy this. Harmony is not purely cultural subjectivity, it is a product of acoustic physics. You don't 'choose' your reaction to music, it's involuntary. John Cage's et al. philosophies are spurious.
@lefthandovRA but Duchamp is displayed in museums all over the world. "Art is art because I say so". Schoenberg came from the same period, basically, so he is just applying that "HAHA, BITCHES LOOK WHAT I CAN DO" attitude to music. Ain't nothin wrong with that.
To analyze music non-subjectively is to do it a great disservice. One of the most basic functions of music is to stimulate emotion in the listener, and emotion is inherently subjective. To analyze a musical piece while completely ignoring the emotions is causes you to feel is to leave a large chunk out of your analysis.
I explain you: read these two books, "Theory of Harmony" by Arnold Schoenberg and "The Fundamentals of Music in the Human Consciousness" by Ernst Ansermet. In the first book you see that Schoenberg deeply knows tradition, and when it come to his method it his very respectful and democratic: he says, "me and my students are trying to" and always explain the motivations of his acts. On the contrary, Ansermet brutally say that Schoenberg music is "wrong", without any motivation.
he is method is great for jazz and not only dont forget that charlie parker himself tried to contact with arnold that concludes a ^^music mentor^^ to him
it might be that this pease of music resembles something real.. huge and dynamic...eg storm in the woods... rocking trees... or storm at the sea Storm maybe sounds atonical and monotone at the same time and therefore atonical 12 tone music simply hits it.. what do you think which music would better describe a storm?
@fuckenloozer He liked Mahler because Mahler was from an earlier generation. He seems to have made that exception. Early on, he didn't mind music by Stravinsky, Bartok, et.al., but that changed. He grew to dislike Stravinsky's music a lot. SOME of it might have had to do with Stravinsky, who made a disparaging comment about "the music of the future," but still...you'd think he could rise above that remark if he really liked it.
12 лет назад
@lefthandovRA Actually absurdity became quite popular between artists contemporary to Schoenberg, mostly after the second world war since it was "reason" what led us unto those huge abominable massacres. Of course in all the great artists like Camus for example there was obviously an overwhelming amount of content between the lines.
