Schoeberg formally changed his name when he moved to America, dropping the umlaut in favor of "oe". Kind of disrespectful of the Center to change it back.
Old Arnold seems more concerned with making it clear to us that Berg was his pupil. He repeats this at least four times. I would rather have heard some insight into Berg. Why does Schöenberg shout in such a pompous manner?
I used to say that, in this case, the pupil exceeded the teacher. But over the years and after giving Schoenberg's works due attention, if have to say they were equals in output, at best.
I don't understand. The association that comes to my mind is that Berg was so subservient to Schoenberg, so dependable on father figures, that he always wanted to fail but he miraculously succeeded, yet when Schoenberg failed Berg hated him for "succeeding" exactly where Berg wanted to "succeed". Is that the case? Is my speculation correct?
Je ne sais pas... Mais lisez cette histoire : Un beau matin, Schönberg, qui se promenait dans Vienne tombe sur Alban Berg. À un moment Berg lui dit : " ça fait un moment que je n'ai pas vu Webern, comment va t-il?" "Oh, c'est pas la grande forme" lui répondit Schönberg...
@@williamblake989 La vie n'était pas facile à cette époque; Berg est décédé en 1935 alors que Webern s'est fait tué en 1945. Il faut croire que ce n'était pas la grande forme pour Berg non plus... Triste. J'adore leur musique à tous les trois.
@@francoisdesnoyers3042 C'était une plaisanterie, un jeu de mot sur le double sens de "forme". Webern n'a écrit pratiquement que des pièces très courtes, des petites formes...
@@williamblake989 Assez drôle, mais je suis un peu déçu quand même. J'aurais bien aimé savoir ce qu'il pensait de sa musique, à part qu'elle soit petite. Il y a parfois des insultes cachées dans les compliments comme dans les jeux de mots. Wagner a dit que J. Strauss (père ou fils, je ne sais plus) était un crâne vide dans lequel soufflait le vent et cela fesait de la musique!
Schoenberg by implication seems to be saying that Berg was loyal to him while others weren't. So Schoenberg stuck to his twelve tone rows and slowly the concert halls emptied when his work was programmed. And his composer followers, once avid proponents of serialism, drifted back to tonality.
@@scottmcgill559 Actually I'm undoubtedly correct. As Ben Earle said in 2003 (re. Wiki) "...Schoenberg, while revered by experts and taught to "generations of students" on degree courses, remained unloved by the public. Despite more than forty years of advocacy and the production of "books devoted to the explanation of this difficult repertory to non-specialist audiences", it would seem that in particular, "British attempts to popularize music of this kind ... can now safely be said to have failed"
@@stevecharman8420 as you are "undoubtedly correct", can you please cite or list "his composer followers who drifted back to tonality" as a result of people fleeing concert halls? Schoenberg himself was a master of tonal music, wrote it at all points in his career, published on it, and that music formed the basis of his teachings throughout his life. Can you please explain what do "British attempts to popularise music of this kind" have to do with anything? Did that also send his "composer followers" back into the arms of tonality? "Music of this type" was not promoted to the general public as though it had a PR department that was trying to sell it to them in Britain or elsewhere. It became effective and popular in film scoring in particular and its influence and use there is permanent which can be detected with little effort through a glance at its repertory and Schoenberg himself wrote a piece with film in mind and advocated for composers to be taught how to score for film at university level, mainly towards the end of his life in the USA.-one of the first major composers to do so The music that utterly failed in the concert hall succeeded in film scoring brilliantly and has widened the expressive power of music significantly. If you like we can do this by e-mail and feel free to bring "Dr. Earle" with you.
![ลองสั่งของจากแอพ temu ถูกจริงหรอ?? [โกงไหมครับ ep.88 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RTcZSQTiDZw/mqdefault.jpg)
I love Sibelius's remark when asked about what he thought of Schoenberg's works : "Schoenberg's greatest work was Berg!"
Do you have some source to this quote? I couldn’t find it on the internet..😕
I suspect that it isn't luck which gave this recording the number 23...
Leo Marillier Omg!!!
The Great Master speaks on Alban Berg. What a treasure.
You can hear the sadness that berg has died and also a deep fondness for him it's lovely
Can you hear that? God bless your ears, - I couldn’t.
Thank you so much for posting this fascinating historical recording. Schoenberg was a truly great composer...and so was his student, Alban Berg.
"Making the belief in ideas one's own destiny is the substance of which are made great man" Arnold Schoenberg: the man who changed music.
if this is actually schoenberg speaking this is awesome!
It certainly is - see the link in the video description
Schönberg ignores that Berg, when composing "Wozzeck," had Italian verismo and not onlyVerdi to fall back on. "Wozzeck" is a great VERISMO opera!
Schoeberg formally changed his name when he moved to America, dropping the umlaut in favor of "oe". Kind of disrespectful of the Center to change it back.
Old Arnold seems more concerned with making it clear to us that Berg was his pupil. He repeats this at least four times. I would rather have heard some insight into Berg. Why does Schöenberg shout in such a pompous manner?
I used to say that, in this case, the pupil exceeded the teacher. But over the years and after giving Schoenberg's works due attention, if have to say they were equals in output, at best.
Thank you !.
why all the reverb?
because nobody bothered acustically treating the place where this was recorded, and nobody cared about adding de-verb processing in post production
Wow! So cool
Schoenberg was jealous of Berg’s success and Berg was jealous of Schoenberg’s failure
So says that idiot Adorno
I don't understand. The association that comes to my mind is that Berg was so subservient to Schoenberg, so dependable on father figures, that he always wanted to fail but he miraculously succeeded, yet when Schoenberg failed Berg hated him for "succeeding" exactly where Berg wanted to "succeed".
Is that the case? Is my speculation correct?
Did Schoenberg also speak of Webern?
Je ne sais pas... Mais lisez cette histoire : Un beau matin, Schönberg, qui se promenait dans Vienne tombe sur Alban Berg. À un moment Berg lui dit : " ça fait un moment que je n'ai pas vu Webern, comment va t-il?" "Oh, c'est pas la grande forme" lui répondit Schönberg...
@@williamblake989 La vie n'était pas facile à cette époque; Berg est décédé en 1935 alors que Webern s'est fait tué en 1945. Il faut croire que ce n'était pas la grande forme pour Berg non plus... Triste. J'adore leur musique à tous les trois.
@@francoisdesnoyers3042 C'était une plaisanterie, un jeu de mot sur le double sens de "forme". Webern n'a écrit pratiquement que des pièces très courtes, des petites formes...
@@williamblake989 Assez drôle, mais je suis un peu déçu quand même. J'aurais bien aimé savoir ce qu'il pensait de sa musique, à part qu'elle soit petite. Il y a parfois des insultes cachées dans les compliments comme dans les jeux de mots. Wagner a dit que J. Strauss (père ou fils, je ne sais plus) était un crâne vide dans lequel soufflait le vent et cela fesait de la musique!
@@williamblake989The second viennese school had also a lot of rows.
Schoenberg by implication seems to be saying that Berg was loyal to him while others weren't. So Schoenberg stuck to his twelve tone rows and slowly the concert halls emptied when his work was programmed. And his composer followers, once avid proponents of serialism, drifted back to tonality.
I do not think you could be more incorrect if you set out to be.
@@scottmcgill559 Actually I'm undoubtedly correct. As Ben Earle said in 2003 (re. Wiki) "...Schoenberg, while revered by experts and taught to "generations of students" on degree courses, remained unloved by the public. Despite more than forty years of advocacy and the production of "books devoted to the explanation of this difficult repertory to non-specialist audiences", it would seem that in particular, "British attempts to popularize music of this kind ... can now safely be said to have failed"
Well, if Ben Earle says so, as cited in Wikipedia, it is so. Lol.
@@stevecharman8420 as you are "undoubtedly correct", can you please cite or list "his composer followers who drifted back to tonality" as a result of people fleeing concert halls? Schoenberg himself was a master of tonal music, wrote it at all points in his career, published on it, and that music formed the basis of his teachings throughout his life. Can you please explain what do "British attempts to popularise music of this kind" have to do with anything? Did that also send his "composer followers" back into the arms of tonality? "Music of this type" was not promoted to the general public as though it had a PR department that was trying to sell it to them in Britain or elsewhere. It became effective and popular in film scoring in particular and its influence and use there is permanent which can be detected with little effort through a glance at its repertory and Schoenberg himself wrote a piece with film in mind and advocated for composers to be taught how to score for film at university level, mainly towards the end of his life in the USA.-one of the first major composers to do so The music that utterly failed in the concert hall succeeded in film scoring brilliantly and has widened the expressive power of music significantly. If you like we can do this by e-mail and feel free to bring "Dr. Earle" with you.
@@stevecharman8420 Your argument is basically "i'M rIgHt BeCaUsE yOu'Re WrOnG"