Skip to main content

Brahms: Symphony #4

I just finished listening to a symphony that has, at a stroke, made this entire blog worth every minute I've spent writing it.

This CD of Brahms 4th Symphony has been sitting on the top shelf of my CD rack, collecting dust, for at least two years. I've never once listened to it until now. And I cannot believe I've let this amazing work lie fallow in my home without even knowing it.

And now I have a new all-time favorite Brahms symphony.
**********************
Carlos Kleiber and the Weiner Philharmoniker
Johannes Brahms (1833-1897)
Symphony #4
Deutsche Grammophon, 1981
**********************
This symphony is so haunting and beautiful that I had to listen to it a second time immediately after the first.

I find the contrast between Brahms' first two symphonies and his fourth particularly interesting. His first two symphonies seem structured and formal, in the style of Beethoven's symphonies (note that this is not an original thought--most serious classical music commentators would agree with this assertion).

Brahms' Fourth Symphony, however, is music of an entirely different style and era. I'll submit to you one brief example: you could easily convince me that the second movement of Brahms' Fourth Symphony was written by Mahler--a composer who to some extent was a contemporary of Brahms, but who wrote much more florid and lyrical music.

Two brief listener notes:

1) Listen to the eight chords played at the very beginning of the fourth movement, and then listen to how the rest of the movement is built around wildly different variations on that theme. This musical form is called a passacaglia.

2) Notice the decidedly un-Beethovenian style ending, yet another clear example of how Brahms made a stylistic break from his symphonic idol. The Fourth symphony resolves itself quickly--it just ends, almost unceremoniously. There's no 25-second series of repeated fifths and octaves like the melodramatic ending of Brahms' First Symphony, or for that matter any of Beethoven's symphonies.

I can't wait to listen to Brahms' Third.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Does Bach Suck?

It's not often that you see a classical music-related comment that makes you spit out your coffee : "Bach sucks because he was not a true composer. A true composer hears the music before he writes it. Bach composed using a mathematical system of numbers which he tought[sic] his students. After his death one of his students published a book “How to write a menuet[sic] with little or no musical knowledge”. Frankly, the result of his work is not musical, the opening bars always sound musical because he copied someone else’s melody, broke it down into numbers and wrote counterpoint from it. Handel did not even like Bach, because Handel wrote music. Anyone who does like Bach does so because they are told to. For a comparison, listen to music by Frescobaldi, Rameau, or Couperin, then listen to Bach. The difference? Something that is musical throughout the entire piece, and something that is musical for 10 seconds and quickly loses interest." Once I'd finished mopping the co...

Schumann: Second Symphony

I stood by the body of my passionately loved husband, and was calm. All my feelings were absorbed in thankfulness to God that he was at last set free, and as I kneeled by his bed I was filled with awe. It was as if his holy spirit was hovering over me--Ah! If only he had taken me with him. --Clara Schumann, after the death of her husband Robert Schumann We return to George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra's exceptional recording of Schumann's Four Symphonies to hear his Symphony #2. ********************** George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra Robert Schumann (1810-1856) Schumann: Symphonies 1-4; Manfred Overture CBS, 1958/Sony, 1996 ********************** When I sat down to listen to Schumann's Second Symphony, I assumed it would sound as Mozart-like as his First Symphony. I couldn't have been more wrong: these two symphonies sound strikingly different. Listener Notes for Schumann's Symphony #2: 1) You can tell right away that this symphony is far more Roman...

Why Classical Music Writing is So Difficult to Read

Have you ever read the liner notes of a classical music CD and scratched your head wondering what the heck the writer was trying to say? Or attempted to read a classical music concert review in your newspaper and felt totally illiterate? One of the things that frustrates many people about classical music is its perceived elitism. It's unfortunate, but most of what gets written about classical music only worsens that perception. Most of the classical music writing I see out there--either in symphony concert program books, in concert reviews in major papers like the New York Times, or worst of all in the little essays in the booklets accompanying most classical music CDs--is quite simply terrible. Often, it is pretentiously written, it is full of industry jargon (yes, even the classical music industry has its own jargon), and it reads like an intellectually insecure liberal arts student's PhD thesis. There are a few reasons for this. First, there's the fundamental difficulty ...