The Classical Appreciation Thread

jammun wrote: Haven't really been through all this thread, but I've always been partial to string quartets:  Beethoven, Debussy, Ravel.  Seems to me this is about as close to a rock band as you can get, obviously not power-wise, but in terms of instrumentation, just lacking the drums.  For classical to me less is more.

Hi, I'm new here, but just wanted t chime in this thread because I completely agree with jammun about string quartets.  In fact my current project is completely based around that idea: http://www.myspace.com/deathmaiden

As you can see from that I'm pretty fond of Schubert's Death and the Maiden quartet, as well as his other late quartets.  I also like Beethoven's late quartets, though they can get a bit dense if I'm not in the mood.

Other string quartets I enjoy: Bartok's 4th, Shostakovich's 8th, and Ravel's.

Aside from that, composers and pieces that cme to mind:

Sibelius' Violin Concerto (amazing melody)
Stravinsky - Rite of Spring
Bartok's Piano Sonata
Haydn - Farewell Symphony
Bach - Passacaglia in C minor (and Stokowski's orchestration!) Art of Fugue

more modern stuff:

Arvo Pärt - Tabula Rasa
Steve Reich - Music for 18 Musicians
Alfred Schnittke - Concerto Grosso No. 1 (Current favorite)

That's all I can think of right now...

kibble_alex wrote: How about a piano piece that have chords that stretch over two octaves in each hand (no arpeggiating) called "Go On Then Brahms, Have a Crack At That" I think it will be recognised as highly innovative in the classical world, don't you agree? Of course, I'm not mocking my favourite composer in a spiteful way What are your opinions on my video from a fellow pianist's perspective? And I love the Paganini variations, I even prefer them to Liszt's versions.

Well, I can play an interval of 8+3 (sorry, I don't know how intervals, especially the composed ones, are called in English - the terms are, anyway, a lot different than in Romanian) with my right hand and an interval of 8+4 with my left hand, so it wouldn't be hard to play those overly stretched chords.

About the video, I don't wanna make impressions like a critic - though, in a way, I like doing music critic i.e. see my reviews - maybe something from the recording blur somewhat the nuances (nuancing), otherwise I enjoyed listening to it. Seems to be a kind of "recreational" play as well...

I didn't play this piece, if I did, I'd probably say a lot more "do this instead of that"...

I like the Liszt-Paganini studies, I played nr. 2 (or 6?) in my 7th & 8th grade. The evolution was pretty much the same as in Brahms' case: grimaces during the first months, then, in the 8th grade, performances in presto leaving my colleagues with their mouths wide open.

Ricochet wrote: kibble_alex wrote: Ricochet wrote: kibble_alex wrote: Ricochet wrote: Suites are so (17)50s, it's just a long piece. Long pieces are so 40s! Op.0 i take it? Op. 220, as the catalogue number will be inversely proportion with the chronological factor. (in English, I have 219 pieces left to write in my lifetime...) May i make a suggestion for your next masterpiece? BTW Ricochet, have you listen to my youtube link? I think you may like it You may inspire me. Just checked it now. You received 5 stars so far, wow! It just happens that, tomorrow, I shall play Brahms' Variations On A Theme by Paganini, 1st book in a class recital. (I'm quite into Brahms lately...I've got these Variations in my repertoire for two years now, might move on to those on an Aria by Haydn soon, plus the 1st Concerto, which has grown to me incredibly, some Waltzes, etc...)

How about a piano piece that have chords that stretch over two octaves in each hand (no arpeggiating) called

"Go On Then Brahms, Have a Crack At That"

I think it will be recognised as highly innovative in the classical world, don't you agree?

Of course, I'm not mocking my favourite composer in a spiteful way

What are your opinions on my video from a fellow pianist's perspective? And I love the Paganini variations, I even prefer them to Liszt's versions.

Ricochet wrote: kibble_alex wrote: Ricochet wrote: Suites are so (17)50s, it's just a long piece. Long pieces are so 40s! Op.0 i take it? Op. 220, as the catalogue number will be inversely proportion with the chronological factor. (in English, I have 219 pieces left to write in my lifetime...)

May i make a suggestion for your next masterpiece?

BTW Ricochet, have you listen to my youtube link? I think you may like it

Long pieces are "Suuuiiiite" (s). 

Edited by Trademark - November 09 2008 at 12:47

Suites are so (17)50s, it's just a long piece.

I'm proud to announce that I've composed something called Music For Invisible Pianoforte. I've already found the perfect musician to play it - no it's not Lang Lang, on the contrary, it's:






Edited by Ricochet - November 08 2008 at 11:22

Jammum, you should check out some music for wind quintets, brass quintets and saxophone quartets (Ok, well chamber music in general) to go along with your string quartets.  You'll find the same sort of intimate interplay between the instruments you often get in prog bands that appeals to you in the string quartets and which can be harder to find in orchestral music.

Edited by Trademark - November 07 2008 at 10:53

Haven't really been through all this thread, but I've always been partial to string quartets:  Beethoven, Debussy, Ravel.  Seems to me this is about as close to a rock band as you can get, obviously not power-wise, but in terms of instrumentation, just lacking the drums.  For classical to me less is more.

Just caught this thread and you can count me in as a classical music listener. Though to be pedantic 'Classical' generally refers to music written between 1730 and 1820. Sandwiched between Baroque and Romantic periods.