# Who Do You Like Better - Liszt or Schumann ?



## Guest (Apr 18, 2013)

Both of these composers have strong but somewhat mixed reputations. Which do you like better? And what are your favorite pieces by either or both?


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

Lisztwhen it comes to solo piano works. Schumann takes everything else even though Liszt's tone Poems surpassed Schumann's orchestration.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

moody said:


> Have you given up on the ugly thread ?
> You must know that this is an impossible question and the answer can only be "BOTH".
> I've got rows of both and love 'em both,sorry but that's all I can say.


oI hate to say it, but I'm going to have to agree with Moody's comment here. I never thought such a day would come!


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

I listen to Schumann more often. Symphonies 1-4 most frequently.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Schumann's piano music is incomparable. But then, in a different way, so is Liszt's!


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

It´s more or less even in my case -

Favourite *Schumann*: P Cto, Cello Cto/Rostropovich-Kondrashin + Casals, Manfred Ouv., Sym 4, Faust Scenes, Piano Quintet, Cello pieces, Kreisleriana, Davidsbündler, Carnaval, Sonatas 1+2, Humoreske, Noveletten/Beveridge Webster, Symphonic Etudes/ Kerer or early Kissin, Arabeske, Fantasy in C, some lieder

*Liszt*: Christus, Via Crucis, Psalm XIII, Chor der Engel aus Faust, Faust & Dante Symphonies, Les Preludes, Mazeppa, Piano Ctos 1-2, Totentanz, Malediction, cello works, Sonata, some lieder, Annees, Harmonies Poetiques, Legendes, Elegien, Consolations, some of the late piano works (La Lugubre I-II, Nuages Gris etc.), Berceuse, Concerto Pathetique, Ad Nos Fantasia.


----------



## unpocoscherzando (Sep 24, 2011)

Schumann, definitely. I especially enjoy the symphonies and the chamber works.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Thanks for posing the question - it stimulated reflection. No answers though.

My interest in Schumann is 90% piano solo, 10% chamber, and all of it colored by the way it whispers to me that, however good things are now, they ain't going to end that way.

It's all the solo piano music for me with Liszt, and it gets better as his life progresses, though the sonata makes an elevation in the middle.


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

Hold on, I have to think about this one.


----------



## Guest (Apr 18, 2013)

I am a long ways away from really knowing these composers. But as things stand...

Of Schumann, so far I like his chamber music, particularly the violin sonatas and piano quintet. I have mixed feelings about his solo piano work, although I like his sonata #2 and recently I enjoyed Hamelin's Papillons. I haven't had much success with Schumann's symphonies except maybe Mahler's arrangement of Schumann's fourth (Chailly). 

As for Liszt, I like his solo piano works and really like his piano concertos. I'm less keen on his tone poems though. And I wish he wrote more chamber music!

I find neither composer's orchestral/symphonic works compelling, but then again I generally prefer chamber, so that's to be expected. 

Overall, I'd probably say I prefer Liszt and I can see a clearer case for Liszt being a "genius" compared to Schumann. The quality of Schumann's output seems more mixed. But then again, Liszt's output was basically limited to the piano (and orchestrations from thence).

All this of course is subject to change as I get to know these composers better.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Klavierspieler said:


> Hold on, I have to think about this one.


I'd have to do more than think. Currently I only know 'Hungarian Rhapsody' by the one and 'The Two Grenadiers' by the other - like comparing 'Greensleeves' with 'Three Blind Mice'. So I'd have to read Wiki articles to find out the important pieces, spend a fortnight on YouTube listening to them at least twice, weigh up the pros & cons, & get back here only to find that the Thread has gone aloft where all good Threads go...

Have to say, all things considered, it doesn't seem worth it...


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I prefer Schumann, but listen to Liszt more. Confused.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Ingenue said:


> I'd have to do more than think. Currently I only know 'Hungarian Rhapsody' by the one and 'The Two Grenadiers' by the other - like comparing 'Greensleeves' with 'Three Blind Mice'. So I'd have to read Wiki articles to find out the important pieces, spend a fortnight on YouTube listening to them at least twice, weigh up the pros & cons, & get back here only to find that the Thread has gone aloft where all good Threads go...
> 
> Have to say, all things considered, it doesn't seem worth it...


There´s a lot of somewhat vulgar Liszt and a lot of rather too heavy Schumann 
- as well as refined Liszt and delicate Schumann.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Ingenue said:


> I'd have to do more than think. Currently I only know 'Hungarian Rhapsody' by the one and 'The Two Grenadiers' by the other - like comparing 'Greensleeves' with 'Three Blind Mice'. So I'd have to read Wiki articles to find out the important pieces, spend a fortnight on YouTube listening to them at least twice, weigh up the pros & cons, & get back here only to find that the Thread has gone aloft where all good Threads go...
> 
> Have to say, all things considered, it doesn't seem worth it...


All of that to express an opinion in this thread  - doesn't seem anywhere near worth it to me either. Listening to the music for your pleasure is a better idea.

There are shadows lurking in _Davidsbundlertanze_, just on the edge of sight/hearing. There are interpretations of _Kinderszenen_ (Schnabel's for instance) that have been known to make my heart ache. The Fantasy, Op. 17, has an amazing 1st movement; it is capable of a great lifting of spirits.

And that is 'just' Schumann. The "mature" Liszt wrote piano music quite as 'autumnal' as Brahms' is, with more cold rain in it. I know that may not seem like a recommendation, but the net effect of listening to it is a cleansing of cobwebs from the mind.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Ah, but Hilltroll, it was well worth typing 'all of that' to get some guidance from you!


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Schumann for me. I love his piano concerto and his symphonies. I couldn't care much less about orchestration. I like it when it's really good, but I don't miss it when it is allegedly poor.

From my layman's perspective much of Liszt's piano music sounds like silent movie piano music with a series of diminished chords while the villain is twirling his mustache. (I'm way over simplifying, but that's the impression I often get.) On the other hand his _Les Preludes_ knocks me out of my chair.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Of the two, I prefer Schumann, mainly because of his orchestral and chamber pieces. I prefer Liszt for his choral pieces. I've tried to get into other works by Liszt without much luck. Maybe one day they'll click.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Both of them were supporters and fans of Schubert. Schumann for rediscovering the Great symphony and Liszt for his numerous transcriptions of Schubert's music.

Musically, I like Liszt more. I have an ambivalent relationship for Schumann's music. Objectively, Schumann is the greater composer of the two but I would argue that Liszt is the more influential. 

Personally, as a person, both of them were tied.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Ingenue said:


> Ah, but Hilltroll, it was well worth typing 'all of that' to get some guidance from you!


The 'all that' I was referring to was the process you were envisioning to gain the info needed to respond. Rereading what I typed, I see the potential for misunderstanding. Leapin Lizards, it's a wonder that _any_ sense gets transmitted in forums, eh?


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Liszt, as I've never heard of Schumannomania


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Manxfeeder said:


> Of the two, I prefer Schumann, mainly because of his orchestral and chamber pieces. I prefer Liszt for his choral pieces. I've tried to get into other works by Liszt without much luck. Maybe one day they'll click.


This is an interesting dilemma, usually it's the other way around. Which works have you struggled with? Played by who? I might be able to help you with works/recordings.


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

To be honest, I find a lot of Schumann to be a little dull. That said, I don't have all that much music by Liszt.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Liszt, of course, but I have a lot more Schumann to explore than I do Liszt.

My favourite Liszt at this point:

Absolute favourites:

Piano Sonata (Arrau).
Christus (Conlon, Rotterdam Phil).
Années de pèlerinage. Deuxième année; Italie (complete, Jando, 1-6 Kempff, Dante Sonata Arrau or Earl Wild).
Variations on a theme from Weinen, Klagen, Sorgen, Zagen (Brendel or Salman).

General favourites.

Années de pèlerinage. Première année; Suisse (Brendel or Berman, Arrau for Obermann).
Années de pèlerinage. Troisième année (Kocsis or Berman).
Harmonies poétiques et religieuses (Phillip Thomson complete, Brendel for Pensee des Morts).
Douze études d'exécution transcendante (Arrau).
Un Sospiro (Arrau).
Le Triomphe funèbre du Tasse (piano solo, Howard is the only one I know of).
La lugubre gondola II, Nuages Gris (Brendel).
Deux légendes (Kempff).
Réminiscences de Don Juan (Earl Wild).
Mephisto Waltz No. 1 (solo piano) (unsure).
Totentanz. Paraphrase on Dies Irae (Zimerman/Ozawa).
Piano Concerto No. 1 (unsure).
Les Preludes (unsure).
Héroïde funèbre (Pletnev, Russian National Orchestra).
Dante Symphony (Barenboim Berlin Phil).

Honorable mentions:

Ballade No. 2 (Arrau).
La lugubre gondola I (Brendel).
La Cloche Sonne (Howard is the only one I know of).
Valses oubliée No. 3 (unsure).
Mephisto Waltzes 2, 3 (unsure).
Hungarian Rhapsodies 2, 3, 8 (Artur Pizzaro complete).
Réminiscences de Norma (Lewenthal).
Ode Funèbres 1, 2 (orchestra for first (unsure), piano (Zimerman) or orchestra (unsure) for second).
Buch der Lieder I (Howard).
Liebesträume No. 3 (Bolet).
Weihnachtsbaum: Carillon, Schlummerlied, Abendglocken (Brendel for Abend, unsure for others).
Piano Concerto No. 2 (unsure).
Die heilige Cäcilia (Ferencsik).
Die Glocken des Strassburger Münsters (Ferencsik).
Missa solennis zur Einweihung der Basilika in Gran (unsure).
Psalm 13 (Beecham or Botstein).
Psalm 137 (unsure).
Ave verum corpus (unsure).
Qui seminant in lacrimis (unsure).
Via Crucis (unsure).
Ce qu'on entend sur la montagne (unsure).
Tasso, Lamento e Trionfo (Karajan).
Orpheus (Haitink).
Hungaria (Joo).
Hunnenschlacht (unsure).
Von der Wiege bis zum Grabe (unsure).
Eine Faust-Symphonie (Bernstein/BSO).
Der nächtliche Zug (orchestra) (unsure).
Concerto pathétique (Richter/Ginzburg).
Fantasy and Fugue on the chorale Ad nos, ad salutarem undam (unsure).


----------



## drpraetorus (Aug 9, 2012)

Liszt, Schumann is rarther uninteresting. OK, dull. My fav is Les Prelude. I also like the Hungarian Rhapsodies, both piano and orchestrated. Totentanz is fun.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

drpraetorus said:


> Liszt, Schumann is rarther uninteresting. OK, dull. My fav is Les Prelude. I also like the Hungarian Rhapsodies, both piano and orchestrated. Totentanz is fun.


Schumann uninteresting? Have you heard the great piano works? I couldn't imagine anyone describing the Fantasie, kreisleriana, Carnival, etc as uninteresting. To me it's piano music up there with the best.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Neither is a particular favourite of mine. My preferred compositions:
Liszt - Les preludes
Schumann - Piano concerto


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

I like both very much but I have a slight preference to Liszt. I also like both of their personalities, but again, with a slight preferance to Liszt.

Favourite works:

Schumann: Violin concerto (posthumous)
Liszt: Christus


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

Weston said:


> On the other hand [Liszt's] his _Les Preludes_ knocks me out of my chair.


Weston, this is the first time I've seen another person mention the Preludes. They are tremendous works! 

_Edit: Wow! I had no idea that the Preludes were so well known! Nice!_

To the OP, obviously I choose Schumann.

But let it be said that I treasure and adore Liszt's music--piano [and organ!], orchestral, and choral.

Liszt and Schumann had an affectionate, if occasionally rocky, friendship. Liszt frequently went out of his way to help Schumann when need be. For example, during the famous legal fight pitting Robert and Clara against Wieck, the vindictive Wieck conjured up numerous preposterous reasons that the judge should rule unfavorably toward the couple's union. Among the list of grievances was this little gem: that Schumann's piano music is difficult to play, thereby indicating a turbulent soul incapable of channeling Wieck's presumably ideal of purely calm, clean music.

Liszt personally wrote to the judges, state ministers, and town mayor, declaring his absolute support and admiration for Robert as a composer and as a man; following which Liszt personally invited both Robert and Clara to the plethora of musical events that he was organizing in Leipzig, Dresden, and thereabouts, while ostensibly also taking care that Wieck was not allowed to attend.

Beginnings of an interesting friendship...

I adore both--but I have a distinct preference for Schumann.


----------



## CypressWillow (Apr 2, 2013)

I find Schumann's music to be more nourishing.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

CypressWillow said:


> I find Schumann's music to be more nourishing.


But you are supposed to listen to it not eat it, also all that manuscript paper gets stuck between your teeth.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Originally Posted by CypressWillow 
I find Schumann's music to be more nourishing.



moody said:


> But you are supposed to listen to it not eat it, also all that manuscript paper gets stuck between your teeth.


I'm guessing that _CW_ is suggesting that Schumann's music is 'soul food' for her. It is for me too, but then so is late Liszt.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

I would choose Liszt at the moment, but that might be because I've heard more of his music.


----------



## GiulioCesare (Apr 9, 2013)

Liszt in a heartbeat.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Originally Posted by CypressWillow
> I find Schumann's music to be more nourishing.
> 
> I'm guessing that _CW_ is suggesting that Schumann's music is 'soul food' for her. It is for me too, but then so is late Liszt.


Well I knew that Didn't I !!! Tsk,Tsk,Tsk.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

moody said:


> Well I knew that Didn't I !!! Tsk,Tsk,Tsk.


Sorry I caught you up on that.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Lisztian said:


> This is an interesting dilemma, usually it's the other way around. Which works have you struggled with? Played by who? I might be able to help you with works/recordings.


I have Mazur doing Les Preludes and something else (Tasso?) and Murray Peraiah doing several pieces, and another one I can't even find. I do like the Weinen, Klagen variations. I've also gone through Gerard Schwartz's Musically Speaking disc on his music and his biography.

I see you've given a discography. Maybe I can work through your list when I get the time.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

moody said:


> But you are supposed to listen to it not eat it, also all that manuscript paper gets stuck between your teeth.


Plenty of fiber, though, I'm sure!

Still, flossing afterwards would be one heck of a chore.


----------



## Celloissimo (Mar 29, 2013)

Never cared for any of the almost-exclusive piano composers, but I would have to say Schumann according to my personal taste.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Never cared for any of the almost-exclusive piano composers, but I would have to say Schumann according to my personal taste.

And how does this apply to either Schumann or Liszt?

Among Schumann's oeuvre there are 4 symphonies, a violin concerto, the Fantasie for Violin and Orchestra, violin sonatas, trios, quartets, a slew of choral works, a cello concerto, the great lieder and more. With Liszt you have the many orchestral works including Poème symphonique No. 3, Les préludes, Poème symphonique No. 4, Orpheus, Poème symphonique No. 5, Prometheus, Poème symphonique No. 6, Mazeppa, Eine Faust-Symphonie, Eine Symphonie zu Dante's Divina Commedia, Deux épisodes d'apres le Faust de Lenau, Zweite Mephisto Waltz... endless choral works, concertos, etc...


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

I like *"or"*. I win this thread.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Manxfeeder said:


> I have Mazur doing Les Preludes and something else (Tasso?) and Murray Peraiah doing several pieces, and another one I can't even find. I do like the Weinen, Klagen variations. I've also gone through Gerard Schwartz's Musically Speaking disc on his music and his biography.
> 
> I see you've given a discography. Maybe I can work through your list when I get the time.


I haven't heard those CD's (except Masur, and i'm fairly ambivalent toward his Liszt), but I trust Perahia and the other disc looks pretty solid. I'm wondering, though, which choral works of his you're familiar with, through which recordings? And also, are you familiar with the B Minor Sonata and the Faust Symphony?


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Schumann


----------



## worov (Oct 12, 2012)

Definitely Schumann. Listen to this :






I'm not that crazy about Liszt. Too much virtuosity, not enough music.


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

Not really clear cut, like many I've got to separate it in genres:

*Piano*; quite even, with a slight lenience towards Liszt. Mostly because FL is more inventive

*Solo Songs*; Schumann, undisputed I'd say

*Choral*; Also Quite even, but perhaps Liszt, he is a bit more ecstatic

*Chamber music*; Schumann, those quartets put him in front

*Orchestral*; Even, no preference

/ptr


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

If we break up by genre I follow ptr almost exactly. 

I wouldn't prefer Schumann's chamber music to many other composers - at least not to Brahms, Schubert, Beethoven, Mozart, Strauss, Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, Saint-Saëns, Fauré, Rachmaninoff, Kodály, Janacek, Bartók, Haydn, Grieg, Debussy, Ravel - but I'm unfamiliar with Liszt's chamber music so of course Schumann wins that category.

With Liszt, I'm generally impressed, especially by the piano music, and occasionally amazed. There's a lot of his music that I don't know well enough or at all, but I have a good relationship with his music. 

But Schumann is a blind spot for me. I'm occasionally impressed and almost never amazed. His orchestral music, aside from the piano concerto which is finally growing on me, does nothing for me. Only songs get me, and they get me good.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

I prefer Liszt by a wide margin, but that says something about me and nothing about Liszt and Schumann, and I think all it says about me is that I prefer Liszt to Schumann. I'm ready for the next question now.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

worov said:


> Definitely Schumann. Listen to this :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What music of Liszt have you heard to make you form that opinion? Which recordings?

As for the Schumann piece, Liszt has many such pieces of a similar quality. Listen to this, to mention just one:


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Late *Liszt* is known to be unusually _devoid_ of virtuosity - works like for instance

_La Lugubre Gondola I-II_: no.I 



 no.2 



_Nuages Gris_: 



_Die Zelle in Nonnenwerth IV_: Cello version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksI4elow_zk; piano version: 



_Via Crucis_: 



_Elegie II_ 




and some early works have that quality too - 
_Romance Oubliee_: 



as well as a lot of the _lieder_


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

^Listened to this earlier today, contains many such pieces. The first piece is Liszt at his most vapid and bombastic, but much of the music is Liszt at his most simple and touching.






There's the wonderfully sensitive and sparse Liszt (Ave Maria (d'Arcadelt) 3:40 - 7:34, Fünf Klavierstücke 7:35 - 14:40, Recueillement 16:42 - 19:12 La Cloche Sonne (a favourite of mine) 19:12 - 21:02, Abschied. Russisches Volkslied 35:47 - 37:46), the depressing, forward looking late music, full of angst (RW: Venezia 15:18, Unstern: Sinistre, Disastro 29:33 - 32:27, Dem Andeken Petofis 32:37 - 35:47), Liszt the inspired tone poet (the second Legende 1:00:00 on), the transcriber (Die Rose aus Zemire und Azor (Spohr) 44:04 - 48:15, Die Rose (Schubert) 48:15 - 52:54, Drei Stücke aus der heilige Elisabeth Orchestral Introduction (a self-transcription, and a beautiful one) 52:54 - 59:54, and Liszt the entertaining virtuoso elaborator (Hussitenlied 21:02 - 27:49, Bénédiction et Serment de Benvenuto Cellini 37:46 - 44:04).


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

I know very little of Liszt's music so far, therefore not really a fair contest. I have listened to his piano concertos, and some of his lieder and that is all. Based on the piano concerto comparison alone I have to give the nod to Schumann's masterpiece. I do have Liszt on my radar for the future, as I'm very interested in his solo piano music and his symphonic work in particular.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Sonata said:


> I know very little of Liszt's music so far, therefore not really a fair contest. I have listened to his piano concertos, and some of his lieder and that is all. Based on the piano concerto comparison alone I have to give the nod to Schumann's masterpiece. I do have Liszt on my radar for the future, as I'm very interested in his solo piano music and his symphonic work in particular.


Liszt's piano concertos are comparable in quality and somewhat in purpose to those by Chopin, except that Liszt's orchestrations are a little better. Chopin needed his concertos to help _name recognition_ in his early days in Paris. Liszt needed material for his concerts in which there was orchestral participation. Schumann's concerto has a fairly convoluted embryonic history, but 'artistic inspiration' was involved.

IMO as a listener, both Liszt and Schumann expressed their 'selves' best in solo piano music. You have good things to look forward to, _Sonata_.


----------



## Robert Thomas (Dec 3, 2015)

Although boring the first time, the more times I listen to a Schumann piece, the more it grows on me. I have wasted too many hours of my life trying to like Liszt.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Liszt's solo piano music is very good, but Schumann's is much better.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

50% of the time I prefer Liszt over Schumann. The other 50% of the time is the other way around.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Mr Ukko (from 2013) says:


> Liszt's piano concertos are comparable in quality and somewhat in purpose to those by Chopin, except that Liszt's orchestrations are a little better.


Not _a little_ better, but considerably better! Chopin's orchestral writing (what there is of it) was abysmal.

I'd have to put my preference for Liszt over Schumann. I like some of Schumann's piano pieces, but his Symphonies are boring and his piano concertos are just okay. His wife had more talent. Even if Liszt had only written his 2nd Hungarian Rhapsody he'd rate higher than Schumann, but he also wrote many other excellent works and IMO contributed much more to the development of music in the 19th century.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Liszt much more than Schumann. I can't stand that over-the-top seriousness in German Romantic Music. Liszt isn't afraid to have fun and is technically way more interesting.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Schumann never writes trash. Liszt's piano concertos as art music, are generally abysmal, although might well work well in a circus (as does the Hungarian Rhapsody no.2. The last little 'friska' in it is actual circus music). Not that I don't have strong admiration for Liszt's best work. But his work is scrappy, there is little coherence in his developing his oeuvre, although I suppose there was a sound economic reason for his early works (he was churning out a lot of those operatic fantasies for an undiscriminating public. Not that quite often this music doesn't transcend the inherent limitations of the form.) Liszt's songs are _extremely_ good, although rarely praised for this, most don't praise his songs because they've never heard them.

Schumann is a unique composer, who is only revealed fully to the initiate. The pure poetry of Kreisleriana, Davidsbuendlertaenze, the Fantasy in C, and Dichterliebe, let alone the Paradise and the Peri, requires a refined sensibility. Some of the music is performed really badly, quite often the orchestral music suffers this fate, but the other day I listened to the Spring Symphony and was once again blown away with the poetic and overwhelming sense of joy in the work, and this is nearly always considered the least of his symphonies. Schumann is the most literate of composers, and the most intellectual (in a certain way; not at all arid, or cerebral, but there is an intellectual quality to his work that makes it different from more 'singular' composers like Mozart Beethoven and Schubert, and indeed Brahms and Faure).

The necessity of understanding Schumann seems to be more of a phenomenon than in appreciating Beethoven, for example. I mean this is a common feeling even amongst Schumann lovers, there is a moment of realization and the depths of his genius become apparent. Liszt is more surface; but for every trashy potpourri where he meanders up the keyboard playing scales and diminished 7ths there is another corpus of inventive and refined Liszt. In fact you can find almost everything there in his vast output. Perhaps he would have been better off composing a bit less.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Schumann. Not Liszt.


----------



## Alkan (Jun 30, 2018)

Right now I like Schumann better, though I believe that Liszt in his finest moments wrote greater music. But he also wrote heaps of lesser music.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Eusebius12 said:


> Schumann is a unique composer, *who is only revealed fully to the initiate*.


Ah, that business of revelation and the ignorance of the uninitiated! Where have I heard that before? Oh yes, here on TC.

Timeline: My first encounter with Schumann's music, 30-odd years ago in piano lessons. On and off I've listened to his music. I like his A minor quartet, his Kinderszenen and other bits and pieces, but he's pretty dull and mawkishly romantic to the point of a stereotype.

However, please direct me to somewhere I can be initiated. Hopefully the ceremony doesn't involve having one's head flushed in the toilet like school initiations.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

eugeneonagain said:


> Ah, that business of revelation and the ignorance of the uninitiated!


You would understand if you already understood. (I'll bet there is a secret handshake too.)


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

eugeneonagain said:


> Ah, that business of revelation and the ignorance of the uninitiated! Where have I heard that before? Oh yes, here on TC.
> 
> Timeline: My first encounter with Schumann's music, 30-odd years ago in piano lessons. On and off I've listened to his music. I like his A minor quartet, his Kinderszenen and other bits and pieces, but he's pretty dull and mawkishly romantic to the point of a stereotype.
> 
> However, please direct me to somewhere I can be initiated. Hopefully the ceremony doesn't involve having one's head flushed in the toilet like school initiations.


Pretty dull and mawkishly romantic? Well to each his own I suppose...you may need some form of ritual cleansing 

This might cleanse your ears somewhat:





















If you bathe yourself in those, no need for toilets, you'll be clean enough


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

A few more










Also, Schumann's music is not mawkishly romantic. I challenge anyone to provide more than 3 examples of what to you are mawkishly romantic pieces. Tchaikovsky on the other hand...


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

My ears don't need cleansing. I've heard all these pieces before, compiling long lists isn't going to change my opinion. I don't necessarily think they are bad, they are just...not my cup of tea. Apart from the last - concerto for 4 horns - which I do like.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Although I'm not at all tunnel-visioned as far as Liszt goes anymore (I can't help but look at my early TC days and cringe, while also of course knowing where it came from), I have to go with Liszt for now. As far as my favourites for each composer they seem pretty even, but there's just a lot more by Liszt that I like. Of course, I'm also much more familiar with his output which probably explains it (I know most of Schumann's piano music but not too much else).


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Eusebius12 said:


> Also, Schumann's music is not mawkishly romantic. I challenge anyone to provide more than 3 examples of what to you are mawkishly romantic pieces. Tchaikovsky on the other hand...


I disagree that Tchaikovsky is mawkishly romantic. I would say that he is gloriously romantic. (These are all very nice Schumann examples, by the way.)


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

JAS said:


> I disagree that Tchaikovsky is mawkishly romantic. I would say that he is gloriously romantic. (These are all very nice Schumann examples, by the way.)


Actually 'mawkishly romantic' may not even be a thing. Tchaikovsky can occasionally be maudlin, or sentimental, in my view. Powerful, pathetic (ie full of pathos), heart on sleeve also. Schumann is generally less heart on sleeve. I thought the reference to Tchaikovsky would be apropos for someone calling himself Eugeneonagain.


----------

