Following a wonderfully enlightening introduction to the piano music of Brahms, you then gift us this scintillating performance of his G minor Rhapsody. The music is so powerful and you play it so brilliantly, Cole, that you squeeze out every atom of its emotional intensity making for both a thrilling as well as a deeply poignant interpretation. We are so privileged in your excellent videography to see your hands craft the music as we follow the score with its illuminating footnotes. But I am curious. Do you play from memory . . . or are you reading the score you present in the recording? And if you do play from the score, I assume it is in an electronic format as your hands are never free to turn the pages! Whatever, I am as ever just blown away with your playing! B R A V O !
Hi Graham, in this recording I play from memory, but sometimes when the piece is relatively new to me, I will use the score. I always keep it close at any rate to make sure I am "on track." Thank you so much for your kind words!
Thank you for this analysis! I played this piece in high school when my teacher assigned it but never really understood it. Your analysis was both validating and elucidating. I will relearn this piece with this new perspective!!
Many thanks for putting this together, Cole. Your playing and understanding of this piece is truly inspiring to an amateur like me. You mention that this piece in some spots defies analysis due to its strange harmonic progressions. Labyrinthine as you say. Was it your experience that this fact made this piece more difficult to memorize? Perhaps I’m not practiced enough in my scales of all keys (or maybe cigar smoking is what brings it all together). Additionally, you stated that this piece is meant to be played very quietly. Is that a practice tradition of some sort for rhapsodies?
Strangely enough I didn’t find this piece so difficult to memorize, despite the striking harmonic progressions. Maybe it’s because it is still written in a very logical if unconventional way. I’m sure a good cigar probably helps, naturally :-) I think I might have been referring to the pp passage towards the end of the development when I was talking about the need for quietness, it’s quite a difficult effect to achieve with the technical writing at that moment. I did OK, but I think Schnabel really nails it there! Thanks for watching and commenting!
I read that Brahms only reluctantly named Op. 79 "Rhapsodies" rather than simply "Piano Works" after the person to whom the publication was dedicated asked him to.
Thank you very much for this introduction to Brahms, the more I listen to it the more interesting it gets, there are some very interesting and unexpected passages and melody lines in it. What makes Brahms one of your favorite composers? Thank you very much for your brilliant performance, I love it. I will also look for his exercises that you refer to in 1 of your other videos, I have now become curious, very inspiring and informative following your chanel! Thank you Cole
Thanks for this comment Joanne! I totally missed this before.... I think it is the intensely romantic sensibility (a strong tendency for nostalgia) combined with classical formalism that I find to be quite fascinating. You might think that these two things would be contradictory, but actually the reconciling of these two elements is part of what makes Brahms so interesting to me.
Great video, and a wonderful performance! I was wondering if you could explain more about the orchestral nature of the first few bars and how it affects the interpretation, shouldn't we emphasize the first voice line (the circled one) to draw attention to the separate instruments? (As th dotted half note implies) Thank you! a very underrated channel as said above
Yes, I think that would be a valid interpretation. For myself (at least when I recorded this) I preferred not to segment the melody in the opening with too much dynamic variation, however Brahms is already signaling that there are two instrumental groups at play here, and later in the development I think that it becomes an important consideration in the interpretation. In the development I especially try to bring out a change in tone quality between the leading voice (played by RH) and the interjections (in the LH) as the overall dynamics decrease. In this way we become aware of the dual nature of this theme-it can be one long melody as at the beginning, or we can start to hear it as two overlapping ideas, as in the development. I also think that some kind of agogic accent can be a useful tool to bring out this detail, for example, lingering on the main voice a little. It's always a balancing act choosing between bringing out every detail in the score and on the other hand making sure you are seeing and projecting the big picture!
The beef between Liszt and Brahms is historically much exaggerated. Is there actually a single authenticated negative comment from either side towards the other? (The infamous Manifesto wasn't written by Brahms, in fact it wasn't even okayed by him before it was published with his name among the signatories.) They had diametrically opposing views on the concepts of program and pure music - but they respected each other very much. I recall reading that Liszt praised Brahms' music when he sightread a few of his piano pieces at their first encounter (which ended with the exhausted Brahms falling asleep during the b-minor Sonata on the back of a gruelling multi-day carriage-ride across Central Europe - I believe it requires quite a bit of bad faith to ascribe any conscious shunning intention to Brahms in this story). From after the Manifesto we have records of Liszt expressing his admiration after attending performances of Brahms' chamber works. We also know from the Liszt-pupil, Arthur Friedheim that Liszt really liked Brahms' Paganini variations - and that Friedheim relayed this info to Brahms making him chuckle a bit and repay the compliment by beginning to talk to Friedheim about how Liszt brought forth the 'classicism of piano technique' quoting to him on the spot by memory individual passages from various operatic fantasies and reminiscences by Liszt. It is a shame that travelling was such a hassle and pain in the 19th century - sadly Liszt and Brahms only met once, I believe they would have gotten along just fine.
Thank you for the comment! I wish it wasn't the case... but unfortunately, the aversion that Brahms felt towards Liszt's music (which grew more marked with time) is only too well documented in his letters. For example a letter to Reinthaler in 1871: "On the 30th we will have to live through Liszt's Christus, and the whole thing is so monumentally boring, stupid, and senseless that I can't understand how all the necessary swindle will be carried off this time." He also disliked the symphonic poems, and seems to have generally felt that Liszt was a bit of a poser. I think it's also telling that Brahms specifically complimented the technical aspects of Liszt's fantasies, rather than their musical worth. Liszt, on the other hand, always generous by nature, doesn't seem to have had any particular problem with Brahms, and even greatly liked some of his music-although he was perhaps a bit soured on Brahms after the infamous manifesto. That whole episode doesn't show Joachim and Brahms in a particularly flattering light (Liszt had shown them nothing but kindness up to that point after all), and it led to Brahms being viewed as the arch-enemy of the Weimar "camp." It's all very much a shame, since I think they actually had much in common in their musical aims.
@@TheIndependentPianist Ah, that's very interesting - I was unfamiliar with that quote! It raises an intriguing question: the quote makes it sound as though by 1871 Brahms was familiar enough with Liszt's Christus to certify it as rubbish. Which is startling because the work was published only in 1872 and wasn't premiered in its entirety until 1873. Interestingly, the only performance from 1871 was a New Year's Eve concert of Part I of Christus (The Christmas Oratorio) in Vienna conducted by Anton Rubinstein with Anton Bruckner playing the organ and Liszt in the audience. Could this be the concert Brahms is alluding to? If so: wow! :) There were earlier performances of individual numbers and the complete Part I in 1867 in Rome (conducted by Sgambati) - but I cannot figure out how Brahms could have had a chance to get familiar with Christus by 1871... also the phrase "this time" seems very odd knowing there had barely been any (even partial) performances at that point. So... I guess it could be that Brahms was bored by the concept of Christus to begin with. Brahms was an atheist - so this wouldn't be too surprising. Add to that a distaste for Liszt's style and we get a case of preconceived judgment. :) I can't really bring myself to imagine Brahms attending rehearsals of the work prior to the concert. :) That Brahms disliked the symphonic poems does baffle me (I mean even Orpheus or Les Préludes or Hamlet or Heroide Funébre...?). Liszt being a bit of a poser seem to have been the general consensus in much of the 19th century (certainly after Heine's public musings on the topic:) - especially after him becoming an Abbée (however sincere his spiritual beliefs must have been - I mean anyone who hears Via crucis stops questioning that aspect of Liszt's being).
It's important to note that Brahms's feelings towards Liszt weren't necessarily outright dislike, but rather stemmed from a difference in musical philosophy and personal temperament. Brahms, a staunch traditionalist, found Liszt's innovative and flamboyant style to be at odds with his own conservative approach to composition. Additionally, there may have been some professional rivalry, as Liszt's virtuoso pianism and celebrity status often overshadowed Brahms's work during their lifetimes. Overall, their relationship was complex and nuanced, with Brahms respecting Liszt's talents while remaining critical of his artistic choices.
This was so helpful as I am playing this for my exam and it gave me a lot more insight to this piece. Thank you
Excellent analysis and playing. I just started learning this yesterday. I think it has potential to become my new favorite piece to play.
Super underrated channel!! Keep it up, I love the black turtle necks as well
Following a wonderfully enlightening introduction to the piano music of Brahms, you then gift us this scintillating performance of his G minor Rhapsody. The music is so powerful and you play it so brilliantly, Cole, that you squeeze out every atom of its emotional intensity making for both a thrilling as well as a deeply poignant interpretation. We are so privileged in your excellent videography to see your hands craft the music as we follow the score with its illuminating footnotes. But I am curious. Do you play from memory . . . or are you reading the score you present in the recording? And if you do play from the score, I assume it is in an electronic format as your hands are never free to turn the pages! Whatever, I am as ever just blown away with your playing! B R A V O !
Hi Graham, in this recording I play from memory, but sometimes when the piece is relatively new to me, I will use the score. I always keep it close at any rate to make sure I am "on track." Thank you so much for your kind words!
Thank you for this analysis! I played this piece in high school when my teacher assigned it but never really understood it. Your analysis was both validating and elucidating. I will relearn this piece with this new perspective!!
Wonderful!
A great, mesmerizing performance.
Many thanks for putting this together, Cole. Your playing and understanding of this piece is truly inspiring to an amateur like me.
You mention that this piece in some spots defies analysis due to its strange harmonic progressions. Labyrinthine as you say. Was it your experience that this fact made this piece more difficult to memorize? Perhaps I’m not practiced enough in my scales of all keys (or maybe cigar smoking is what brings it all together).
Additionally, you stated that this piece is meant to be played very quietly. Is that a practice tradition of some sort for rhapsodies?
Strangely enough I didn’t find this piece so difficult to memorize, despite the striking harmonic progressions. Maybe it’s because it is still written in a very logical if unconventional way. I’m sure a good cigar probably helps, naturally :-)
I think I might have been referring to the pp passage towards the end of the development when I was talking about the need for quietness, it’s quite a difficult effect to achieve with the technical writing at that moment. I did OK, but I think Schnabel really nails it there!
Thanks for watching and commenting!
Hope to hear more Brahms in this Channel.
I enjoyed today's video very much, great performance, as always!
This piece haunts me. What does it say about Brahms' internal state?
I read that Brahms only reluctantly named Op. 79 "Rhapsodies" rather than simply "Piano Works" after the person to whom the publication was dedicated asked him to.
I'd love to see an analysis of his g minor ballade as well
Definitely! That will becoming up at some point soon.
Thank you very much for this introduction to Brahms, the more I listen to it the more interesting it gets, there are some very interesting and unexpected passages and melody lines in it. What makes Brahms one of your favorite composers? Thank you very much for your brilliant performance, I love it. I will also look for his exercises that you refer to in 1 of your other videos, I have now become curious, very inspiring and informative following your chanel! Thank you Cole
Thanks for this comment Joanne! I totally missed this before.... I think it is the intensely romantic sensibility (a strong tendency for nostalgia) combined with classical formalism that I find to be quite fascinating. You might think that these two things would be contradictory, but actually the reconciling of these two elements is part of what makes Brahms so interesting to me.
Great video, and a wonderful performance! I was wondering if you could explain more about the orchestral nature of the first few bars and how it affects the interpretation, shouldn't we emphasize the first voice line (the circled one) to draw attention to the separate instruments? (As th dotted half note implies)
Thank you! a very underrated channel as said above
Yes, I think that would be a valid interpretation. For myself (at least when I recorded this) I preferred not to segment the melody in the opening with too much dynamic variation, however Brahms is already signaling that there are two instrumental groups at play here, and later in the development I think that it becomes an important consideration in the interpretation. In the development I especially try to bring out a change in tone quality between the leading voice (played by RH) and the interjections (in the LH) as the overall dynamics decrease. In this way we become aware of the dual nature of this theme-it can be one long melody as at the beginning, or we can start to hear it as two overlapping ideas, as in the development. I also think that some kind of agogic accent can be a useful tool to bring out this detail, for example, lingering on the main voice a little. It's always a balancing act choosing between bringing out every detail in the score and on the other hand making sure you are seeing and projecting the big picture!
The beef between Liszt and Brahms is historically much exaggerated. Is there actually a single authenticated negative comment from either side towards the other? (The infamous Manifesto wasn't written by Brahms, in fact it wasn't even okayed by him before it was published with his name among the signatories.) They had diametrically opposing views on the concepts of program and pure music - but they respected each other very much. I recall reading that Liszt praised Brahms' music when he sightread a few of his piano pieces at their first encounter (which ended with the exhausted Brahms falling asleep during the b-minor Sonata on the back of a gruelling multi-day carriage-ride across Central Europe - I believe it requires quite a bit of bad faith to ascribe any conscious shunning intention to Brahms in this story). From after the Manifesto we have records of Liszt expressing his admiration after attending performances of Brahms' chamber works. We also know from the Liszt-pupil, Arthur Friedheim that Liszt really liked Brahms' Paganini variations - and that Friedheim relayed this info to Brahms making him chuckle a bit and repay the compliment by beginning to talk to Friedheim about how Liszt brought forth the 'classicism of piano technique' quoting to him on the spot by memory individual passages from various operatic fantasies and reminiscences by Liszt.
It is a shame that travelling was such a hassle and pain in the 19th century - sadly Liszt and Brahms only met once, I believe they would have gotten along just fine.
Thank you for the comment! I wish it wasn't the case... but unfortunately, the aversion that Brahms felt towards Liszt's music (which grew more marked with time) is only too well documented in his letters. For example a letter to Reinthaler in 1871: "On the 30th we will have to live through Liszt's Christus, and the whole thing is so monumentally boring, stupid, and senseless that I can't understand how all the necessary swindle will be carried off this time." He also disliked the symphonic poems, and seems to have generally felt that Liszt was a bit of a poser. I think it's also telling that Brahms specifically complimented the technical aspects of Liszt's fantasies, rather than their musical worth.
Liszt, on the other hand, always generous by nature, doesn't seem to have had any particular problem with Brahms, and even greatly liked some of his music-although he was perhaps a bit soured on Brahms after the infamous manifesto. That whole episode doesn't show Joachim and Brahms in a particularly flattering light (Liszt had shown them nothing but kindness up to that point after all), and it led to Brahms being viewed as the arch-enemy of the Weimar "camp." It's all very much a shame, since I think they actually had much in common in their musical aims.
@@TheIndependentPianist Ah, that's very interesting - I was unfamiliar with that quote! It raises an intriguing question: the quote makes it sound as though by 1871 Brahms was familiar enough with Liszt's Christus to certify it as rubbish. Which is startling because the work was published only in 1872 and wasn't premiered in its entirety until 1873. Interestingly, the only performance from 1871 was a New Year's Eve concert of Part I of Christus (The Christmas Oratorio) in Vienna conducted by Anton Rubinstein with Anton Bruckner playing the organ and Liszt in the audience. Could this be the concert Brahms is alluding to? If so: wow! :) There were earlier performances of individual numbers and the complete Part I in 1867 in Rome (conducted by Sgambati) - but I cannot figure out how Brahms could have had a chance to get familiar with Christus by 1871... also the phrase "this time" seems very odd knowing there had barely been any (even partial) performances at that point.
So... I guess it could be that Brahms was bored by the concept of Christus to begin with. Brahms was an atheist - so this wouldn't be too surprising. Add to that a distaste for Liszt's style and we get a case of preconceived judgment. :) I can't really bring myself to imagine Brahms attending rehearsals of the work prior to the concert. :)
That Brahms disliked the symphonic poems does baffle me (I mean even Orpheus or Les Préludes or Hamlet or Heroide Funébre...?). Liszt being a bit of a poser seem to have been the general consensus in much of the 19th century (certainly after Heine's public musings on the topic:) - especially after him becoming an Abbée (however sincere his spiritual beliefs must have been - I mean anyone who hears Via crucis stops questioning that aspect of Liszt's being).
It's important to note that Brahms's feelings towards Liszt weren't necessarily outright dislike, but rather stemmed from a difference in musical philosophy and personal temperament. Brahms, a staunch traditionalist, found Liszt's innovative and flamboyant style to be at odds with his own conservative approach to composition. Additionally, there may have been some professional rivalry, as Liszt's virtuoso pianism and celebrity status often overshadowed Brahms's work during their lifetimes. Overall, their relationship was complex and nuanced, with Brahms respecting Liszt's talents while remaining critical of his artistic choices.
Hi
I’d please like to know how long it took you to learn the piece. What are the difficulties of it?
This channel is a gem,I love Brahms. would you ever consider doing an analysis of Liszt piano sonata in b?
Absolutely. One of my favorites, but I'm holding it in reserve until I have time to really do it justice...
@@TheIndependentPianist oh goodness I am soo excited. Take as much time as needed.
🤔😊