10 Works I Still Don't "Get"
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2023
- 10 Works I Still Don’t "Get"
It's all my fault...
Wagner: Parsifal
Schumann: Carnival
Tchaikovsky: Rococo Variations
Brahms: String Quartets
Handel: Water Music
Rachmaninoff: Piano Sonata No. 2
Elgar: Cello Concerto
Beethoven: Fidelio
Bach: Keyboard Concerto in D minor, BWV 1052
Mozart: Requiem - เพลง
Parsifal is easy to dismiss. It has none of the bells and whistles of other operas; moreover, it's like watching paint dry. But I discovered over the years, that is precisely what Wagner had in mind: He wanted as few distraction from his gossamer waves of music as possible. Parsifal is the greatest 5-hour musical meditation ever written. Forget the story; forget the producation; and for the most part, you can even forget the singing. Bathe in the liminal light of one of humankind's greatest gifts to the ear and soul: A full orchestra given over to Parsifal's spell.
It’s a shame Celibidache didn’t record it. 😅
@@ollierdevon Even his life was too short for that
Definitely has bells...
@@ContemporaryClassical 🤣
I find Parsifal so beautiful and so moving. I was very sick about a year ago and during a particularly dreary night in the hospital I found the finale to Parsifal playing on a local classical music station. It made such a profound impression on me that I started crying. I really don't care about the libretto- most of Wagner’s librettos strike me as silly or overwrought. But his music is transcendent and got me through a tough night.
21:35 - “It encapsulates everything I don’t like about Bach…”
Look over your left shoulder, Dave, he’s staring at you RIGHT NOW!
Some years ago I saw Parsifal in Paris and London on successive evenings. Covent Garden was my home venue but I finished my Paris appointment with plenty of time so off I went to the Bastille performance. It's a deeply moving work that explores pain, dying, rebirth, the cycle of life. One of the wondrous things about Wagner is that before he wrote an opera he constructed a new musical language, and this is so evident here. It adds greatly to the holy grail artworks, and I'm confident that Dave will one day tell us how essential it is.
Not on consecutive days but I did see Parsifal twice in one week in Seattle. I had the same reaction that I did seeing Meistersinger. Never did five plus hours pass so quickly.
Kundry may be the most fascinating, certainly most enigmatic character in opera.
Oh, the Good Friday Spell. The tune introduced on the oboe and then full strings could be a candidate for Most Beautiful Most Rapturous Melody Written in the Nineteenth Century.
@@bbailey7818 -- Absolutely agree about the Good Friday Spell -- the most heavenly tune ever composed. I want it at my funeral! But I think what Dave meant was that in the opera, with the men's voices droning above the glorious orchestral part, obscuring the great melody, that yes, it could be possible to practically miss the whole thing in a live performance. It's definitely far better without the singing.
It's a devotional quality that serves as catalyst for the expression, and one has to listen for this in order to appreciate it.
When you mentioned the Brahms string quartets, I nearly jumped out of my seat. I feel SEEN. I adore his chamber music but I check out any time his quartets are on.
Thank you.
I adore Brahms to a possibly unseemly degree but truly dislike the quartets even when perfectly payed they are hard to like - give the Clarinet Quintet or the Piano quintet any day!
Yep, big Brahms fan here but not the quartets.
On Parsifal, when it premiered in the UK at the beginning of the 20th Century, a critic wrote that “Parsifal is the kind of opera where you sit down for a performance that starts at 6.00 PM and, after three hours, you look at your watch and it is 6.15 PM”. I love Parsifal and I get it, but I admit that II is not for everybody.
That remark comes from George Bernard Shaw. If you're interested in music criticism, Shaw wrote music criticism for many years in London. It's good if you're interested in the late C19 as well. Shaw also wrote about the premier of the Brahms Requiem that "the only resemblance this has to a requiem is making the audience wish it were dead." He retracted this 30 years later, but I love the comment and agree with it. I do not recant.
I often have the feeling that Parsifal is for nobody and that this is probably the mystery of its being so preciously soporific.
Classical Music is not for everybody either. Even within the same composer, say Beethoven, the unwashed masses go bananas over his easier pieces, but how many appreciate the LATE QUARTETS?
@@rokubo75I like the sound of Parsifal and will happily put it on when I'm working, but years ago I left a production at Covent Garden at the first interval. So when Beecham said 'the English don't like music they just enjoy the sound it makes' (or words to that effect), that kind of nails me on this.
@@anastassiosperakis2869T S Eliot did.
I think a talk about which composers have and haven’t benefited from posthumously published work would be really interesting.
Hello David, I'm not sure what the best venue is to express my deep thanks to you for the sheer joy you have provided me over the last few weeks, since I first discovered your TH-cam talks, but I'll do it here. I love your sense of joy in music, first of all. Beyond the joy, however, is the sheer amount of information you provide. And, yes, the humor. Yes to the wonderful humor that pervades all of your talks, and in keeping with the humor, is an incredibly balanced view you have about music in general: it’s not there to make us smarter or feed our self-importance, or make us feel better than others: it is there to enrich us with joy. Adding all this together is the cumulative value that your talks have given me an insight about how to think “at all” about music. Emerson (or Thoreau, can never remember which) once said that a poet is the person who says what we have been thinking all along but were unable to articulate or express it. And, voila!, that’s where you come in. You have truly provided a whole bunch of aha moments where I thought, Yes, that’s what I’ve been trying to say! So, I guess you are my honorary poet. That’s not a bad distinction, right?
Here’s an example. You mentioned in your discussion of Eroica recordings something about Beethoven writing his symphonies organically. That helped me with something I have been wondering for decades, which is this: why do I love Beethoven as a composer? I mean, he couldn’t write a tune to save his life. (Yes, he wrote the Ode to Joy tune, but that’s about it. This may also explain why Beethoven couldn’t write an opera. Incidentally, I am above all an opera lover and I couldn’t agree more with you about Fidelio being so much less than the sum of its parts). Nor is Beethoven considered a master orchestrator - I mean, nobody puts him in the same breath as Ravel or Rimsky-Korsakov or Berlioz, do they? So what makes Beethoven Beethoven? You gave the answer with the word organic: Beethoven is trying to say something with his music that goes beyond a key signature, or correct sonata form, or whatever. Now, I suppose lots of composers are preachy (what was Schoenberg if not preachy?), so I guess there still has to be more of an answer than I have so far, but you got me thinking in a productive way. Somehow, Beethoven was able to channel his humanitarian impulses in a musically powerful way that others have simply failed to do. Another by the way: I love the Eroica, but I also love Symphonies 4 and 8; it’s the 6th I could happily do without.
Here’s another for instance. You helped explain to me why, as an opera lover, I have never been able to warm to either Eugene Onegin or Pique Dame. Your suggestion with regard to Tchaikovsky’s Rococo Variations (I hope I took it in the right direction) is that Tchaikovsky was trying to channel the classical era. Aha, I said, that’s why I don’t respond to Onegin, because I like Tchaikkovsky the barnstorming composer, not the Tchaikovsky who tried to write like Mozart.
Thank you also for your thoughts about what makes music spiritual in your talk on Bruckner’s 7th. By the way, when I was in high school (many, many moons ago) I bought an LP of Ormandy’s Bruckner 7 (on the same day I bought Ormandy’s Mahler #1 with the Blumine movement). Because I enjoyed that recording, I felt obligated to have high regard for everything else Bruckner wrote. Thanks for relieving me of that burden. Your neighing horses for Bruckner, by the way, are phenomenal! I still do like movements 1 and 2 of the Bruckner 7 and the opening movement of his 4th.
As it happens (I save the dangerous confessions for last) I am a big Solti fan. Even here, though, I listen carefully to you and consider seriously what you say. I totally agree, for instance, that Solti could only perform fluff as fluff. I was shocked to find out that he even recorded Rossini overtures! I was also shocked, in a different way, by your mention of the concert where Solti got lost during a performance of Rite of Spring. Amazing! I never would have believed he could be sloppy.
Thank you again for your fabulous videos.
Thank YOU! I'm deeply touched and honored by your kind words.
Wonderful appreciation, very well put.
"True wit is nature to advantage dressed - what oft was thought, but ne'er so well expressed." (Pope)
Dear Dave, your description of the Bach anxiety and feeling of "chase" is EXACTLY why I love this keyboard piece, cos that's the point of it. It's like someone's lost inside a labyrinth, chased by the Minotaur. I'd 'score' a suspence film with it🙂 It is a very interesting idea to post on pieces we( all individually) not 'get',though. And it is absolutely profound when that light-bulb turns on when/if we eventually DO feel we get it. As a performer it's like solving a puzzle. finally. a great feeling.
It made me laugh that even though Dave doesn't get Carnaval, he still has " a couple of dozen versions lying around" ! A great talk, esp on Parsifal and FIdelio
because so many brilliant pianists have played it, and they get such brilliant pianism out of it
There are two works that introduced me to classical music - and really turned me on to music in general, more than 30 years ago - and those are Bach's Brandenburg Concertos and Handel's Water Music. I just immediately fell in love with them. To me they were never generic baroque music - and indeed they are not - but rather they represent everything I love about baroque music. To this day, these are among the few works I just can't get enough of.
Of course, it may be the same deal with Water Music as with The Goonies, or The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother - you'll love them if you watched them when you were 12.
Not surprised that "Parsifal" makes this list. I love it but cannot feel surprised when others find it intolerable. The Transformation music -- hell, everything in the Grail castle -- is like the last act of "2001: A Space Odyssey": Either it sends you on a mystic journey into unnameable realms, or it just annoys the hell out of you.
Almost all the music of Delius. I remember a man telling the story of another man playing on the piano a song called something like 'All those wasted years', and crying his heart out while playing it. And I thought, it that was me it would have been me crying about all those years of listening time wasted as I was listening over and over again to Delius hoping it would eventually grow on me, but it never would. Fortunately I wisely decided to let Delius pass me - it is just not for me.
I think you have made the correct decision to stay away from Delius. He is just not for everybody. He IS for me! I love his music, but I have some reservations about one or two of his pieces: The Songs of Sunset and the Requiem, are wonderful music, and I love them both, but I can see no mass appeal to the general music lover. But - if you are just not in tune with Delius, you must just accept this. It is not a failing on your part, though, perhaps, Delius could have considered the needs of his listeners, a little more.
Although I am a great fan of Delius, I can appreciate your view. In his large scale choral works like “A Mass for Life” his thick harmonies can be rather tedious to the ear.
I adore Delius but some of his lesser works ramble on endlessly for sure. I get he's a bit marmite.
Snap. His music - to these ears - is not distinctive. Ditto the piano music of Faure.
@@davidgoulden5956 I find Faure's piano music generally lovely for about 20 seconds, tolerable for another 15, then it becomes unbearable.
Laughed out loud...thank you!
Great stuff! You made me remember the day I first heard Van Beinum's 1958 Concertgebouw recording of the Water Musick that I'd never "got" before and like you wondered how the must have sounded on the Thames (certainly not like that), sitting there spellbound, and now I do. It's fascinating what a single performance can do for one's appreciation of music one hardly had the patience to sit through before.
The Leonard Rose (Ormandy?) recording of the Rococo Variations changed my reaction completely. I could listen to this over and over.
I second this! Despite using the Fitzenhagen edition, that recording's colour and humour are unmatched.
Such interesting choices. I cannot imagine my life without the Schumann Carnaval. I've been known to walk down the street singing the entire thing. I was just listening to it before I started watching this video.
dude, with "astrology" in your name, who can take you seriouslyt???? Even if you replace it by "VOO DOO SCIENCE" it will be BETTER.
@@anastassiosperakis2869 you're pathetic. let people do their thing.
Don't be an asshole. @@anastassiosperakis2869
@@anastassiosperakis2869 your comment is borderline, voodoo science?! Said to a black person?
Taken as a whole, I have to agree about Fidelio...but there are some really great moments contained within; the prisoner's chorus, for one, has always moved me on a deep level
first act is full of such wonderful wonderful melodies though.
Being part of the choir in Mozart's Requiem was my very first (!) major musical experience/performance, so it obviously blew me away, and it's a piece that will always be close to my heart. However, listening to it now, I can most definitely recognize how clunky and "weird" it is. So even though I personally like it, I won't fault you for disliking it.
I totally agree with you on the Mozart! Especially the tuba Mirum.I’ve sung the Mozart a few times in my church choir, and that’s enough!
I was a teenager when I first heard the Mahler 9th, Horenstein disc. I couldn’t get over how depressing an impact it had on me. Now, I’m in my 80’s, and it is his greatest, most emotionally gripping symphony.
I also totally agree on the Bach, and I’m a Bach lover!. Thank you for your frank and Hilarious comments.
Bob Williams
1
Britten's requiem is better than both Mozart's and Verdi's.
@@donkeychan491 Not better than Verdi's (nothing could be), not better than Berlioz's either. But better than Mozart, sure. Actually, the main problem with the War Requiem is that Britten is so in love with the Verdi Requiem that he can't quite free himself from it (this is a sentiment I first heard expressed by Lucas Foss when the piece was relatively new).
Agree. My particular favorite is by Berlioz.
The Elgar cello concerto is an interesting piece for discussion. I totally agree that it is not exciting. It is basically sad and introverted. It is well documented that it closely follows the Great War, which changed Elgar's life in so many ways. He and his world had changed. Many of us believe it is a beautiful piece, but it is a sad beauty. I get that its feel is somewhat old fashioned. I think Elgar must have felt old fashioned himself. Where was that wonderful life and the people he used to share it with? So I wonder what is needed to 'get' such a piece?
An added problem is one of expectation, and it is one that haunts more of Elgar's work. As the musical icon of England, he has been consistently overrated in my view, not least by the British press. That is not to say that he's a bad composer in any way, but I don't think he the god among men (the men being people like Parry, Stanford, German and others) that people imagine him to be. Aside from a few really impressive highlights Elgar can be quite pedestrian. To me the Cello Concerto is of fairly average inspiration for an Elgar work, and let's not even pretend it's on the same level as either of the Dvoraks.
@@8Termini
The British press eh?
_Gentlemen, let us now rehearse the greatest symphony of modern times, written by the greatest modern composer - and not only in this country…_
(With the sound of tears in his voice) _this is a real Adagio - such an Adagio as Beethove' would 'ave writ'."_
-Hans Richter (not British)
_If you want to know whom I consider to be the greatest living composer, I say without hesitation Elgar... I say this to please no one; it is my own conviction... I place him on an equal footing with my idols, Beethoven and Brahms. He is of the same aristocratic family. His invention, his orchestration, his harmony, his grandeur, it is wonderful. And it is all pure, unaffected music. I wish Elgar would write something for the violin._
-Fritz Kreisler (not British)
@@johnpeate4544 The British press among others, yes. The fact that Kreisler was also a fan is hardly surprising considering that Elgar wrote a Violin Concerto for him, but it doesn't really mean all that much in this context.
@@8Termini
Read again. Kreisler says _”I wish Elgar would write something for the violin”._ He hadn’t written it yet. He said this in 1907, the violin concerto was 1910. So your theory doesn’t hold.
Also why were Sibelius, Strauss, Vaughan Williams, Stravinsky and Mahler, among others, admirers of Elgar’s music?
@@johnpeate4544 True, but Kreisler was quite chummy with Elgar some time before that. However, you seem to miss the point. I never stated that Elgar was a "bad" composer (see above), just that his reputation has been inflated because of persistent support from a British classical music press looking for a "national composer" - a press that held a dominant position since London was the de facto world capital of classical music during the second half of the 20th century.
To provide a fair answer to that question it's less important to look for admirers than to determine where those admirers rate Elgar as a composer relative to others. And I think that for the likes of Stravinsky, Strauss and Mahler Elgar, although sympathetic, was a _relatively_ peripheral figure as far as their direct cultural orbit was concerned.
Also, I think that it is almost impossible for an Englishman to give a balanced assessment of Elgar as a composer, because he's become such a big part of English cultural heritage. You could say the same, by the way, of Germans and Beethoven or the Dutch and Rembrandt.
Really enjoyed hearing your honest opinion on these works. The description of Bachs concerto made me laugh out loud. Now I am going to listen to it again with your comments in mind! 😅
Thank you Dave, I would like to shake you by the hand for your observations on Elgar's cello concerto; I feel exactly as you do but I could never have put it so well. Also my parents tell me I once slept soundly all the way through a broadcast of Parsifal on the BBC - - in my defence I will add I was four days old at the time.
I'm so glad you made this video! I agree 100% about the Rococo Variations! I thought I was the only one who didn't love it! I also feel the same way as you do about the Brahms string quartets, while like you I love the rest of his chamber music, especially the string quintets! Now, I love Parsifal, but I do understand why some people would not like it. But I must say, I think Elgar's Cello Concerto and the Mozart Requiem are masterpieces.
One work that I don't get that everyone else seems to love is Beethoven's Missa Solemnis. I've tried listening to it many times, including the celebrated Gardiner recording, but I just don't get it.
I was thrown into the deep end with "Parsifal". I had an insane German Lit professor who showed us Syberberg's insane film. I fell in love with it through that. Yvonne Minton sang Kundrey and Aaug Haugland sang Klingsor.
Oh Lord, that film is horrendous. Especially the schwastika motifs in the beginning, and a female dubbing the role of Parsifal.
@@eddihaskell The whole film has been uploaded here on TH-cam. To my Professor's credit, he also showed us Fassbinder's "Berlin Alexanderplatz".
@@josefkrenshaw179 Me thinks good experiences to have had 🙂
I'm in the minority here, I see. It took me some years, but I now see "Parsifal" as an overwhelming, original masterwork. It's hugely powerful, and worth your time in a good performance. The MET did well with it a decade ago: Jonas, Rene Pape, Katarina Dalayman. Daniele Gatti conducted. It was given a plain,. modern production, keeping out of the controversy of "What it means". Alan Wagner's article: The Mixed-Up Theology of "Parsifal", from a MET intermission feature about two decades ago, shed some very interesting light.
@@donaldjones5386 I don't want to start up yet another polemic but Dave's theme was "What I still don't get", so I guess that's why "What it means" has a reason to be considered. So what about the alarm that some people do get from Parsifal then? One could even put forward that some German composers had a rough time dealing with the end-of-life time 🙂
I just discovered your channel recently, thanks to a video about Janacek Simfonietta (great video BTW).
I was expecting, by the title of this video, something from Ligeti or Bartok, so was kind of surprised about the list, but it makes sense. I also like things that most people don't and vice versa.
Totally agree on your introduction, it's ok to not like things other people do and otherwise. I wish more people would think and act like that.
Thank you for the video!
I love hearing big time classical music lovers admitting they don't get certain works that others froth over. We all have them!
I don't know if anyone has mentioned it, but the performance of the Bach BWV 1052 by Edwin Fischer is glorious, if very pianistic.
I was in general agreement, then you hit Fidelio and I hit the LIKE button!
Me too. Fidelio bores the hell out of me. Parsifal is transcendent
As a Rach Sonata No. 2 lover, I just want to put a word in for Nikolai Lugansky's rendition. Along with Kocsis' version, and maybe Hamelin's, it's probably the best one out there - while it sacrifices a touch of the drama at the peaks, Lugansky's textures are just a bit more warm and rich. The slow movement is meltingly lyrical, and heartstoppingly romantic in classic Rach style, using the simplest of motifs. It did take about a week of listening to this sonata in depth, and really observing the counterpoint and extremely thorough thematic integration (which you also pointed out), to appreciate the work fully - it's a dense, difficult work. I hope it does the trick for you at some point in the future!
I must listen to the Kocsis recording! Dave turned me onto his recordings of Rachmaninoff's Concertos and Rhapsody.
For the 2nd Sonata, am a Horowitz and Weissenberg partisan - quite different interpretations, but both are amazing.
@@robertjones447 godspeed! I highly recommend, Kocsis is electrifying.
Horowitz for me too - that 1966ish version. I did hear him play it live in London but he was past his very best by then, sadly. I am mystified by Hamelin who just sails through the final part of the last movement in an almost emotionally detached way. It seems to me to be a piece that requires 'over the top' playing in the way that the work itself is 'over the top.' It's almost as if he doesn't like or understand the work although I'm sure he has his reasons for playing it the way he does.
Freddy Kempf made a superb record of the 2nd Sonata. Light in timbre but full in power. The start of his 3rd movement is exceptional. The whole thing is glittering and light touch, which helps to lift this dark piece out of the sludge and illuminate it.
John Browning has also made a great performance, his 3rd movement stands out from the rest imo
For me it's the slow movement of the Elgar that lets the cello concerto down (and Sir Ed. could usually turn in a good adagio). Just when you think a poignant tune is about to emerge it collapses into a few trite sequences and ends with what sounds like a slowed down version of "We ain't got a barrel of money". The scherzo could do with a bit more melodic interest too.
Very funny, thank you. I am still laughing. For me, it is the last movements of Mahler symphonies. They could be cut in half and still be too long. The man wore his heart on his sleeve, and such a long sleeve. Great writing, but still.
2, 3 and 9 are too long. 1 and 7 about right. 8 I love every moment. Not sure about the others.
Great - and typically honest - review, Dave.
I'm sort of with you on the Rachmaninov sonata no 2. I don't really get it, but I heard Steven Osborne play it (live) and thought it was fantastic. I thought "At last! Now I understand it!" But when I subsequently put on recordings of it (even Osborne's own!) I still think: "I don't get it."
For me, a composer I don't get but feel I probably should is Bartok. It just leaves me cold. But it took me years to come to Stravinsky (whose music I now love - in all his phases), so I'm hoping that one day the Concerto for Orchestra will really excite me.
As a cellist, I am of course bummed out that you called out the Rococo Variations and the Elgar Concerto, but I have to confess that in both instances I can see your point. Elgar ultimately I think is a better piece, and I also think that the world-weariness of the piece is actually one of its main ideas. However, dwelling on this as the piece does invites the type of reaction that you have to it. We cellists are of course delighted that these two genius composers took the trouble at all.
Hello Dave!
I would like to ask you to consider to make a talk about the 10 works which are among the ones you love the most.
Best wishes Fred from Kristianstad.
Hey, Dave, thank you for the interesting discussion! I can't believe the Eroica didn't make your list … is there going to be a Part II of this subject? 🤔
Dear Dave, you are opening new avenues in opera appreciation: giving Leonore a gun to shorten the action and making Klingsor a better marksman with a spear that does close the second act in fatal fashion. Genius. Not sure how soon this new vision will be adopted, but I cannot wait to hear more proposals, practical or not, along this line. Mimi getting well for one more act. Turandot with everybody sleeping at the right moment. Please, do not keep us waiting.
Turandot ends immediately after the death of Liu. The crowd goes nuts, kills both Turandot and Calaf, Ping Pang and Pong retire and everyone lives happily ever after. Oh, and Timur gets a condo in Miami.
When it comes to classical vocal music, since I don't pay any attention to librettos and lyrics, I am free to focus on the quality of the music itself. Consequently, I find Fidelio, like Mozart's Magic Flute, to be full of great tunes. I find that Beethoven's talent for melody is greatly underappreciated and it's not surprising to me that Beethoven's favorite composer was Handel.
@@erikthenorviking8251 I think your last two comments were meant for Dave, not me. You need to move them up one level.
That would be a pretty fun topic for a video - Composers and their favorite composers.
At almost my fifties, I'm having cello lessons. My teacher told me to listen the Rococo Variations, and I answered that I quite dislike this work (it's the Tchaikovsky Tzigane for me). He just said: "well, I don't like It either, but there is no much more romantic repertory".
And I think it's the reason they have survived.
Opposite for me. Love rococo, and the elgar. Don't like the queen of spades much. It's all so subjective.
@@normanarmstrong3838 well, as Prince Orlofsky always says: "chacun a son goût". 🙂
I was first attracted to your videos because you expressed likes/dislikes so similar to mine, for example my least favourite Beethoven symphony is No.3, I don't actually like it despite it's greatness. I am so pleased to see that I agree with your list, apart from the Rachmaninov. I love everything he wrote.
Regarding the Elgar concerto I completely agree, it's sentimental and DuPre is a bit OTT.
I just recently descovered your TH-cam videos and i want to say that i really like them.
Grim is good!!! Sorry, I can't resist the Bach D minor concerto, especially Glenn Gould's performance in one of Leonard Bernstein's "Young People's Concerts" ( however unidiomatic it might be) My 8yr old son on seeing this insisted his hands were like dementor claws which I got a kick out of. You are right, the piece is fairly relentless but I guess sometimes I find that enjoyable too (Leonhardt fits the bill here as well).
The Turangalila Symphony. Its meaning is lofty but everything about the music seems calculated to get on my nerves. Stravinsky remarked that all Messiaen needed to write it was a plentiful supply of ink.
Waterboarding may be illegal, but the Turangalila Symphony is more effective.
Do not get O M's music at all. A few years back the Cleveland Orchestra played one of his pieces in Wien. I disliked every single moment of it and wish I could have that time back. @@gregorystanton6150
I feel the same way about basically every single Messiaen piece unfortunately; haven't yet found another composer I fail so miserably to enjoy despite him supposedly being one of the more accessible modern composers.
Great video. You made me revisit the “Rococo Variations” and I love them even more now. I want to thank you. I’m not being snarky. It’s just a happy accident.
Sure! To each his own!
Berg's Piano Sonata sounded mechanical and cold until Glenn Gould played it. He gave it a Gustav Klimt sheen which worked very well for me.
Growing up with my dad's classics I couldn't help but absorb a lot. Here's a left field suggestion though... 'modern music that a classical composer might have appreciated?' I'll cite Genesis with 'Firth of Fifth' to start. Forget the 'prog' label. It's just damn good music with a classic structure. I promise you won't be disappointed...
Well, don't see either the Rachmaninoff or the Elgar the same way. For me both works deal with tragedy & loss. Maybe for some either they are too muddled or they don't rise to that level. For me they both do. Isn't music wonderful in the ways it can speak in so many different voicess to so many different people.
Mark Lee
Austin, Tx
Agree on much of this, and your reasoning behind your opinions. Must say the Mozartiana(?) is one of my favorite pieces of music for charm and beauty. Viva la difference...
Funny thing about Mozart's Requiem, if such a thing can be funny, some of my most moving live performances have been of this work, but I have yet to find a recording that produces the same effect. Perhaps there is something about the context of performance that makes it great, at least for me. I was in Paris in 2019 and witnessed a concert that I will never forget, at Saint Sulpice Church, by Hugues Reiner Choir, Euromusic Symphonic Orchestra, with Hugues Reiner, conductor - not the greatest or most well known conductor and I imagine most of the performers were amateur or semi-pro at best, but it was absolute magic. I understand that this concert was a tribute to the victims of the Bataclan terror attack in 2015, perhaps giving it a special quality.
I want to second that sentiment on Schumann's Carnaval, I feel similarly indifferent about Kinderszenen. Ironically, I am probably the greatest Schumann-fan there could be. I absolutely LOVE his piano music, it's probably the reason why I decided to become a musician. My favorites are Davidsbündlertänze, Kreisleriana, Phantasie in c major and of course Novelletten. All works I'd consider to have some of the greatest piano music ever written.
What I like about this video is that your opinion is based on listening to the works extensively, rather than dismissing them out of hand. Completely with you on the Elgar!
I had always felt the same way about the Bach BWV 1052 until I saw the recording by Jean Rondeau (Warner Classics) on youtube. It totally changed my opinion. As a plus, at 2 minutes 15 seconds, the camera zooms in on JR’s finger work and it is the strangest finger work I’ve ever seen: one finger from the left hand with a right handed chord dancing around it.
I _needed_ the Horowitz to make me see the Rachmaninoff as worthwhile sensuous sumptuousness, but Weissenberg & Kocsis & Lugansky & Porogrelich are what made me LOVE the piece
As a long time viewer of the channel, I saw the requiem being the however piece from a mile away! :)
Thanks for your wonderful channel and another utterly enjoyable video (including, as usual, some interesting and/or entertaining/delightfully controversial surprises). As for the Rachmaninoff sonata, I fell completely in love with it upon listening to Horowitz’ rendition in my late teens. And my response at that point was solely of an immediate, emotional kind. Later on I ended up performing it a lot. Admittedly, I consider it to be a monothematic masterpiece in a style verging on something Scriabinish. In my mind it simply is one of Rachmaninoff’s crowning achievements, also intellectually, his B minor sonata, as it were. I somehow prefer the first version, as it rolls out the material more satisfactorily, but like quite a few others, I have also applied a combination of the two.
I almost completely agree on Parsifal, but I do love the good Friday music ... and could not even tell why. The main motive doesn't appear particularly strong, and yet it has a very powerful uplifting or soothing quality while it is developed.
I love opera but am similarly cool on Fidelio. I prefer Schumann's Kreisleriana to Carnival by a mile. I also think his first 2 piano sonatas are unfairly neglected. There is an excellent Pollini recording of the 1st Schumann sonata which will knock your socks off. I agree as well on the Rach 2nd sonata, although I heard a really convincing live performance in London once. In the first movement, the way the more lilting, slower theme appears reminds me of a similar transition in the 1st movement of Medtner's g minor sonata. There's a great recording by Benno Moiseiwitsch. Cheers!
ADORE Schumann's piano music. Never really liked Carnaval, even though - like all the composer's piano music - it is memorable. Would take the opening two pages of his first piano sonata over ALL of Carnaval.
I love the characterisation of the Bach d minor concerto - it is indeed GRIM (I happen to love it for that reason - I like the "hellish implacable machine" aspect of it). Bach used it as the Sinfonia for a Cantata with the text "we must pass through troubles to reach Gods kingdom" so I think that fits. The example where I fully agree with you is Fidelio which I find so disappointing theatrically even though some of the music is wonderful.
I think the Water Music's popularity has to do with it's title and the history of it's first performance. It's like Penderecki's Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima. Would it be as well known if it were called A Study in Strings?
Very good point made here...this is something that all modern composers seem to have picked up on; an evocative or thought provoking title added to an otherwise abstract work seems to make it more appealing to modern audiences. Carrying your point on, would John Adams Short Ride in a Fast Machine be as popular if it were called Fanfare for Orchestra? On all these points, I say, I doubt it
most Penderecki is trash though
A friend of mine always maintained that the success of Penderecki's Threnody was all in the title. Had it been called 'Murder in a Polish saw mill' , an equally apt title, it would have got nowhere.
@@julianneller4658 True, but we should probably take into account that the titular topic inspired the composer's pen (or at least his thought) as he was working on the piece. That may or may not be always true, but just "tacking on" a title would be awfully cynical, so I will go on persuading myself the music represents its subject matter through the lens of an individual artist. It is the quasi-abstract "titles" (like in Boulez and some other post-modernists) that drive me crazy. They pretend to say something, when really they disclose nothing at all! :)
A saw Penderecki conduct the Threnody in Columbus, Ohio about ten or so years ago and I never saw so many Japanese people in one place in my life. There aren't many of them here. More power to him, though. It got him recognized.
Dave, interesting talk - congratulations on making your viewers think, accompanied with a dash of humour. The pieces you do not get raises the question of why some works are accepted by a wide consensus as undisputed masterpieces eg Beethoven's 9 symphonies, last Mozart symphonies, Figaro etc. What makes a musical masterpiece? This seems to be something which transcends individual tastes. What are the magic ingredients?
I appreciate how you put this as pieces you just don't get. I've tried to do this myself, rather than indulge my inner curmudgeon (I don't always succeed 😂).
For me “getting” a work involves an inner emotional connection (whether logical or not) rather than any structural reality. This “getting” is often related to external or internal context. Luckily there is more music than times and thus there is no need to listen to music I either just don’t like or get.
Someone once wrote about a work by John Adams that he listened to it while driving on a long trip and hated it, but decided to play it over again and felt a little better about it, so he replayed it again and again until he came to enjoy it. So I tried it on Bartok's Fourth String Quartet. Drove across West Virginia and part of Kentucky before giving up. Maybe I'll try again someday...
Wagner - “long & slow”. I need to laugh, because I like Wagner only when I get the 5 minute highlight of his works. Thanks for this episode, as I feel guilty if I listen to a piece and at the end I just have “???” in my head, because it must be my fault as a listener.
Nietzsche went from being a friend of Wagner‘s to enemy status - and his most bitchy comments - after saying he was an artist deeply embedded in FRENCH romanticism - was that he was essentially a miniaturist out of control
My thanks for your insightful post. I think there's a point, in everything you say, that makes antipodes seem always a good neighbourhood. What you just said about Brahms' quartets is exactly what I thought when I first heard them (the first in particular). Eventually, I grew into adoring them, but then again, after listening to you, the very pillars of my worship seemed to founder. Shall I, eventually again, grow back into disliking them (like I grew back into disliking Schwarzkopf, for different reasons)? Who knows...There's no good dialectic incapable of switching the mind's eye
Perfect assessment of Brahms and his quarters/sexters, etc. I think, like Mozart, he struggled with the texture. He just seems to need a piano, or an extra viola or cello. Mozart certainly spoke to this, claiming he never quite felt comfortable with quartets.
Thanks for pinpointing exactly why I always cringed when the Mozart Requiem got to the Tuba mirum. Even among the other lesser parts the thing sticks out like a sore crumhorn.
Right there with you on the Schumann and the Brahms! I've tried for years, still don't "get" those! But the Mozart Requiem? Have you heard Colin Davis's first London recording of it? As to the Rachmaninoff, one of my favorite pieces, look at Zoltan Kocsis's live performance of the much more technically challenging original version, one of the greatest things I know.
You've never (I believe) discussed Mozart's Mass in C Minor, at least not on TH-cam. Does the fact that that also wasn't finished factor in to this? I prefer it to the Requiem, though there are sections I find wanting.
Elgars cello concerto seems to me quite straightforward, its structure and themes are easy to identify and follow
Rach's second Sonata is a bit much for me at the moment as well. When I was in a bad mental state some time ago, I felt like I understood every note. There's a lot of deep darkness and agony in that piece (with some prettiness in between), and as always, I find Rach to be exceptional at honing in on very specific human emotions and expressing them in an incredibly delicate way. Even when the emotions are as dark as they are in the second Sonata, the "sludge" becomes clear when seen through the right lense. To me at least!
I'm happy I discovered the Kocsis recording as a result of this channel, but I can also recommend the newer Steven Osborne recording on Hyperion. Osborne is one of my favorite Rachmaninov (and Prokofiev) interpreters and I love the way he plays the 2nd sonata on that Hyperion album, personally.
@@kingconcerto5860have you seen the Kocsis performance on TH-cam? I love the CD, but watching him play this Sonata live is something else!
@@soozb15 Absolutely =)
If anything the 1st Sonata is the dark problem child. The 2nd Sonata has many fine performers (others have listed Lugansky, Hamelin, I think Freddy Kempf is stellar). The 1st Sonata does not make sense unless performed in a spirit of complete abandon by a pianist who can just do that... Alexis Weissenberg is the man. When you hear the right performances, the pieces suddenly open up. For me, Weissenberg in 1st Sonata, F. Kempff for 2nd Sonata.
I'm quite surprised to see that so many people found it hard to listen to because it was basically what first got me into Rachmaninoff, whereas I found that I didn't understand the first sonata until 5-6 listenings.
I'm with you on most of these but what is there to "get" about Handel's Water Music? It's just a series of catchy tunes, kinda like a Beatles record such as "Rubber Soul." It doesn't develop a theme or go anywhere. Just one catchy tune after another until you're out of catchy tunes.
I first heard the Water Music as recorded by Hermann Scherchen, and fell head over heels. It is hauntingly beautiful throughout. I have listened to it countless times; for around a year it was my go-to music on my iPod when I needed something motivational at the gym. I have subsequently tried other more contemporary recordings, and they all bored me to death, so I can see where you are coming from. Similarly I would very highly recommend Scherchen’s Handel Op. 6 concerti grossi. They are amazingly beautiful. I also have tried and wanted to enjoy Fidelio as well as Brahms’s “overly wrought “ quartets. On the other hand I cannot live without the Leonore Overture #3 (it “belongs” to Fidelio). Sometimes it occurs to me that to know and love Beethoven, and you could choose one work, it would be this. My favorite is by Fricsay. Finally I do feel bad admitting that as hard as I try, I do not independently enjoy the Mahler symphonies, except a few moments here and there. Thank you for your wonderful channel.
But surely the Water Music is just one theme played 750 times? It is musical torture.
I would recommend listening to Scherchen's version, before drawing any final conclusions. I also found myself bored by all other interpretations, there is something unique about Scherchen's, that I can't put my finger on. It's really beautiful and as many times as I have heard it, it still doesn't bore me. @@clementewerner
I really liked the music from LOTR movies and wanted more of it. So I went to Parsifal opera twice. It was insane. I only did it for the music.
I love Brahms's chamber music of all kinds, and I strongly agree with your view on the overly-written Quartets.
Parsifal is my favourite Wagner Opera BUT I do not speak or understand German well and I listen to it just as music: with the voices simply other 'instruments'.
The length and turgidity of Wagner (fnarr!) is a huge turn-off to a listener like myself who’s never heard a whole opera in his life. Parsifal is the one that appealed to me as an entry point, since it seems to be at the more confectionary end of Wagner’s output. I have no problem with “difficult”, chromatic music, but there’s only so much sturm und drang I can take.
I made a breakthrough with Parsifal when I found out that the "Transformation Music", the opening of the Second Part of Act 1, had nothing to do with the Eucharist. - It was to accompany the stage set changes.
I think that's a good way to approach Wagner. The more you know about his stories, characters (or, for that matter, himself) the less appealing it all becomes. Hasn't turned me off it, though.
The Bach D minor concerto BWV 1052 is a curious work. Bach seems to have liked it a lot, because he used its music in two cantatas, with an organ soloist. All of the harpsichord concertos, except the Fifth Brandenburg and the C major concerto for two harpsichords, are believed to be transcriptions of violin or oboe originals. And, for me, they usually come over better when reconstructed back to their supposed original scoring. The middle movement of the D minor concerto seems to need a more dynamically expressive instrument, such as a violin.
Balance can be a real problem. It’s one reason many performances feature just solo strings (essentially, a string quartet plus double bass). This “low-budget” scoring gives the harpsichord the best chance at being heard in detail over the strings.
My first recording of the D minor was with Zuzana Růžičková, on a “modern” harpsichord. I actually found it pretty exciting. Jean Rondeau’s version is pretty good too.
Completely random, but have you ever done a room tour video to show your CD collection? We’d love to see that if you haven’t done one!
Yes I have.
My literary versions of this are Ulysses and Infinite Jest. I have started both a bunch of times and have never gotten anywhere with either. And yes, there are plenty of long novels (Anna Karenina and Moby Dick, for starters) that I adore.
Among Tchaikovsky's pseudo-classical works is the String Serenade, which has been a favorite of mine for as long as I can remember. So he could work within that style, at least to me.
As far as Schumann's Carnaval is concerned, Nelson Freires recording did it for me.
Some of these titles I knew were coming based on your videos.That's why I also was expecting Barber's Summer Knoxville !915.
I admire the Barber--it's a perfect marriage of text and music, even if it drives me crazy. I can't say I don't get it.
Re: Parsifal, you acknowledge the music is gorgeous, it's the libretto that is horribly dull and pretentious. Of course it is! There is nothing great in it that you don't get. Wagner was an INDISPUTABLY atrocious librettist, with Parsifal being the most egregious (and Die Walkure and Tristan being the least, but they're still bad). Saying you don't get it gives Wagner too much credit.
I learnt Bach’s piano concerto BWV 1052 at my nursery age listening endlessly to my parents LP with Edwin Fischer (1933). I have just listened to it again and listened the performance by David Fray and Kammerphilarmonie Dresden on Erato - oozing sensuality and romanticism. I think piano performances should be more tolerable than harpsichord, David.
Well, Bach oozing romanticism will probably not be close to HIP practice :)), but I generally agree that Bach on a modern piano may "speak" easier to various listeners. There's no sin in experiencing different approaches to a given work, and it may just "open up".
Any given Nielsen symphony falls in this category for me. For too long, I heard that Nielsen was a logical next step for an avowed SIbelius fanatic, but I could never make an emotional or intellectual connection. (Whenever another Sibelius lover asks me what composer's symphonies to check out, Vaughan-Williams is my usual recommendation.) As for Dave's choices, I couldn't agree more about the Mozart Requiem, though the Lacrimosa greatly moves me. Conversely, I am very fond of the Elgar cello concerto, but I couldn't argue that it isn't musty.
Sibelius and Nielsen have nothing whatsoever to do with one another stylistically. Take him on his own terms and forget about Sibelius when listening and you'll be in much better shape.
Mozart's Requiem and Handel's Water Music are sentimental favorites for me since they are some of the first pieces I listened to when I was discovering classical music. A piece I don't get is Brahms' 2nd Symphony. It just doesn't do anything for me. Yet I've probably seen it performed live more than any other symphony. My daughter's youth symphony did it, then her college symphony. The Chicago Symphony was on tour near me, and they played Brahms 2. Maybe I am just tired of it.
Brahms 2 was a sleeper for me, it seemed kind of hohum compared to the other three. After increased exposure, particularly playing it a couple of times or so in orchestra, it became -- really good!
Mine is Rachmaninoff Corelli Variations. It just goes on for ever and ever and seems more like an exercise in writing variations than a finished piece of music to me.
Some works are inherently irrational; the only way to make them "go" is to get the audience to suspend disbelief. PARSIFAL might be the biggest of these in the overall "central" repertoire. IMHO the 1962 Knappertsbuch does this best, followed by the 1980 Kubelik, which of course is better played and recorded.
Add much as I love Brahms' various solo instrument sonatas, trios, piano quartets, various quintets and sextets, I am right there with you on the string quartets...So navel-gazing, abstract - and yes,
monochrome !
IMHO the Delius Cello Concerto - composed at the same time as the Elgar CC - succeeds at what Elgar @tries@ to do, with more inspired tunes (or at least fragments of tunes)...And what an enchanting ending.
Finally, THANK YOU for having the courage to call out Mozart's REQUIEM. I never understood why
the C MINOR MASS isn't more loved and better known - incomplete as it is.
i love the Delius double concerto too. No idea why it's not played more often.
Rostropovich's recording with Ozawa might change your mind about Rococo. The way Slava's cello sings is glorious and sounds almost like the human voice.
Thank you, Dave! You are a delight to listen to. I feel the same about 7 of the pieces you ”don’t get”, but love the Elgar concerto (perhaps partly because I knew and loved Jacqui who was an exceptional and wonderful person), enjoy the Bach D Minor concerto, and Mozart’s Requiem I find very satisfying and quite beautiful. What would the world be like if we all felt the same about everything? Just boring!! Thank you very, very much for all that you give us; it is fun, enjoyable and gives us much to think about. 🩷 😊
I agree with you about the Elgar. It's the second most popular cello concerto with good reason. Deeply moving. My only gripe is I remember its getting programmed so often in Seattle and elsewhere that it unfairly excluded other fine cello concertos like the Barber and the Walton. And I'd love to hear Herbert's or Sullivan's more! But far better the Elgar again than the dreary Schumann.
I don't mind the Brahms String Quartets. The Schumann String Quartets, however, compel me to remove my own appendix with a knife and fork.
As for the Bach concerto in d minor, I do agree with you. I suggest you check out the recording by Bahrami and Chailly. Bahrami plays it in a much more light-hearted way that makes the music fun to listen to than the conventional recordings.
Another fun video to do would be something like "Works That I Like With That One Movement/Part I Can't Stand." And you can't pick the pastoral movement in Symphonie Fantastique, that's practically cheating.
And yet many of us adore it. Now, some of Berg...
That's the best bit!
What about Siegfried Act 3? Once she´s woken up, they take forever to decide to have sex. Will I, won´t I, should I, shouldn´t I? It just seems to go on and on. The music is good, but the feeling that they should just wrap it up is overwhelming for me!
@@dabedwards This reminded me of Toscanini's comment about Act II of "Tristan und Isolde." Making fun of the sheer length of time it takes for Tristan and Isolde to get it on, Toscanini said, "If they were Italians, they'd have seven kids by now!"
For me, Parsifal has always been like a cheese danish served ice-cold. I know it's got the stuff there to be something great, but because of the temperature, it just sits there like a rock.
One work that I have issues with is the Bach Brandenburg No. 5. In the middle of the first movement, the violin and harpsichord just keep going and going like the Energizer Bunny. However, the Sixth is different because there are no violins. I actually played that one and enjoyed it. The Fifth, I may never get it.
The other piece I don’t get is Messiaen’s Turangalîla-Symphonie. It’s not the ondes martenot. I like the sound of that instrument, but the piano is just too much for me.
Maybe it’s just me, but I gave them a chance. That’s the only thing I can do other than to keep on listening.
Thank you,
Paul D.
I first heard Brandenburg Five in the 1950s, with piano and stodgy tempos. Hated it. Still not a favorite, but it's more tolerable with current performance practices.
Franck's Symphony in D minor. I have tried for the better part of my life to like it. I just don't. To me it sounds awkward so many places. Nice little bits, but on the whole - not so much. To me I can almost hear Franck whispering while it plays - "ya see what I did there?" Le sigh....
Completely agree. Studied it at school, and it sounds clumsy and dull.
I don't personally love Francks only symphony but it is a dense work and it has its moments of brilliance
I disagree, but enjoy hearing your commentary. I was immediately drawn to the symphony but struggled for a while to "get it", as the title of this video would have it. I've since grown to love it and don't understand the feelings about it being 'clumsy'
1. Brahms: German Requiem
2. Beethoven: Hammerklavier Sonata
3. Nielsen: Symphony No.4 "Inextinguishable"
4. Mozart: Don Giovanni
5. Dvorak: Cello Concerto in B Minor
6. Puccini: Madama Butterfly
7. Mahler: Symphony No.7
8. Bruckner: Symphony No.7
9. Copland: Symphony No.2
10. Harris: Symphony No.3
Don Giovanni especially. I can listen through all the others and feel meh, but Giovanni for whatever reason, I start listening to it and I start to get this mental itch that makes me want to listen to anything else - anything else by Mozart, Messiaen's L'ascension, Schoenberg...anything other than Don Giovanni. And the music is perfectly fine. It's no less tuneful than other Mozart, or anything. I just can't stand it.
I get some of this, but the Nielsen Fourth? I went absolutely berserk after an incendiary performance by the St. Louis Symphony and can't wait to hear it again.
Didn't you mean to include Tzigane?! I always that was even less of a favorite of yours than the Mozart Requiem. By the way, I feel about the Berlioz Requiem the way you do about the Mozart. At any rate, great talk. I appreciate the specificity with which you make your case for (actually, against) any given work.
Elgar Cello Concerto! Priceless! Thank you for having the nerve to single out such an insufferable piece despite the much worshipped "DuPre recording".
What's your opinion on Schumann's other Carnaval-themed piano work, Faschingsschwank aus Wien?
I don't know Hurwitz's opinion, but I can give you mine for what little it's worth (just a 40 yo amateur pianist). Faschingsschwank is one of Schumann's best, but I had completely forgotten it even existed until I read your comment. Richter, Perahia and Michelangeli thought highly enough of it to give exciting and thoughtful readings, but otherwise it's pretty rarely played. Why? I honestly can't imagine. It's wonderful.
Here's an idea for you Dave..... a post of music you listen to when you are in various moods. Music when you are in a bad mood: Hanson's Symphony No.1, Good Mood: Daphnis et Chloe, Romantic Mood: the final scene from Fanciulla del West, music for writing papers (in grad school): anything by Wagner etc. Just thought it might be an interesting idea....
David your TH-cams are a national treasure and I think I would say this even if we weren't old friends from your salad days. But I too really don't get Carnival ( and I adore almost everything else of Robert Schumann) and the Mozart Requiem ( not up to the level of his Missa Brevis') Similarly I have a terribly weak spot for Elgar but simply don't get the Cello Concerto
Thanks Paul. It's always great to hear from you. I hope you're doing well.
Hi Dave!
I also find the ten works you outlined here to be hard to get into and share this difficulty as well. For me, my top ten works I simply do not get are the following:
1. All of the Mozart piano sonatas that not among K330-333. With the exception of those four, they sound pedestrian compared to any of Haydn’s or Beethoven’s.
2. Speaking of Beethoven, his Mass in C absolutely bores me to tears, and I was forced to sing it in college, which only made me appreciate it even less. I love his Missa Solemnis, especially the middle three movements, but God the Mass in C is intolerable.
3. The Schumann Piano Quartet: Square and lifeless compared to his beautiful Piano Quintet.
4. Brahms’ Cello Sonatas: I think they are both snoozers compared to his other chamber music, save for his string quartets, and especially when comparing them to the two Faure Cello Sonatas that are masterpieces.
5. While we’re on Faure, his Theme and Variations: I LOVE variation form and love much of Faure’s solo piano music, but his theme and variations sound like he threw them together so he could say that he wrote a set of variations.
6. Bruckner’s Fourth Symphony. The first movement is nice, but the rest sounds disorganized and hastily patched together to my ear.
7. Richard Strauss’ Sonatines for Winds. The first one sounds like he decided he was going to write forty minutes of wind music but ran out of things to say after just five. So he tried again with the second, but the same thing happened. Thank God he gave up and didn’t write a third.
8. Stravinsky’s Firebird. All of the versions sound like a huge let down compared to Petrushka or The Rite of Spring.
9. Schoenberg’s Verklarte Nacht puts me to sleep every time.
10. Boulez’s supposed masterpiece Pli Selon Pli. My wife calls it “Please Do Not Play.” Do I need to say anything more about this one?
Thank you for your great insights as usual, Dave!
I get what you mean about Bruckner 4. First movement is great, I think the third movement is phenomenal, the horns are so exciting.
But the last movement, I get it, you’ve got that one big buildup to a possible climax, then he pulls back, and then the ending just…happens. The form is more frustrating than most Bruckner which is saying a lot.