# Melodious Bartok?



## Korados (Aug 2, 2014)

Today I heard the Romanian Dances by Bartok again and everytime I ask myself is if there are other works which are just as melodious as these pieces. His later output is very experimental and I don't know if I'm really fond of it. Are there any other works that are that tonal or melodious?


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

You'll have to forgive my lack of knowledge of musical terminology, but I think I understand what you're getting at. This may be just my personal stance, you may not agree, but I find his String Quartets to be melodious and not at all "difficult" to listen to. I personally find them no more difficult than Beethoven's Late Quartets, OK, maybe a bit more difficult! But you understand my point. They are my second favorite group of String Quartets after Beethoven's. Perhaps start with #4.

Takacs Quartet recording is the one I give quite a bit of listening time to


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Try the 44 violin duos.


----------



## SuperTonic (Jun 3, 2010)

There are lot's of great melodies in the Concerto for Orchestra. I often find myself humming along to the "Game of Pairs" movement (second movement).


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

The second and third piano concertos have great moments in them. The middle movement of the third is heavenly!


----------



## Guest (Sep 26, 2014)

Seconding the 44 Duos. By their very nature, they're as tuneful as Bartok can get!


----------



## Whistler Fred (Feb 6, 2014)

In addition to the above suggestions, both Bartok's 2nd Violin Concerto and Divertimento for Strings contain wonderful folk-inspired melodies.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Just bypass Bartok and listen to folk music if you feel that way.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

If you are going to try a string quartet, I would recommend the sixth, given the criterion you stated. The others at the top of my list would be the Concerto for Orchestra and the Third Piano Concerto. All three of these works are full of memorable melody.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bartok melody?
Check out the opening soaring melody for the violin of the Violin Concerto #2 and the beautiful melody given the solo violin in the second movement.


----------



## Korados (Aug 2, 2014)

Yes, I know the Concerto for Orchestra, the Third Piano Concerto and the first movement of the Second Violin Concerto. I heard pretty much by him but nothing by him impressed me as much as the Romanian Dances. Did he actually wrote these melodies himself or are that just transcriptions of folklore?

I find the String Quartets immensely hard to listen to. I don't know the 44 Duos, so I guess I'll start that. Thank you!


----------



## Guest (Sep 26, 2014)

I'm not coming up with any music by Bartok that's _not_ melodic.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

some guy said:


> I'm not coming up with any music by Bartok that's _not_ melodic.


Haha, I was beginning to feel alone with this observation. I wonder what definition people are holding.

But, for a recommendo, _The Miraculous Mandarin_ is quite touching.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

SuperTonic said:


> There are lot's of great melodies in the Concerto for Orchestra. I often find myself humming along to the "Game of Pairs" movement (second movement).


Wow, that's freaky. That earworm has been buzzing in my head all day.


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

If you can get through the rest of his fifth quartet, the finale contains a oddly familiar, yet novel melody. Cannot miss that. And you likely are aware of that.

I will bandwagon on the _violin duos_. Fantastically entertaining. Like a play, or dialogue, really. Well, that is plainly apparent. Pardon my stating the obvious.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

I find much of Bartok's work wonderfully melodic. And what's more, such marvelously exotic melodies - he really takes you on a trip to some far off, colourful world of his own.


----------



## mikey (Nov 26, 2013)

Harmonically, it's his middle stuff that is the most radical. Once in America, he toned it down and you end up with pieces like the Concerto for Orchestra and 3rd piano Concerto which are no where near as hard hitting as something like the Miraculous Mandarin.

If you want Romantic-type melody, go for the early stuff which is Strauss/Liszt influenced. The Scherzo for piano and orchestra is a strange piece, quite un-Bartokian in the common sense but has wonderful orchestration and a number of 'big tunes'.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

some guy said:


> I'm not coming up with any music by Bartok that's _not_ melodic.


I fully agree with you on Bartok, melody and lyricism, but on the other hand, is it really that difficult to get that for some people, 'melodic' and 'melody' are only or mostly in the realm of simpler folk song or pop & folk-song like tunes?

Yeah, I generally recommend about all of Bartok, but really tailored to those limits the OP apparently has in mind their as what they hear as melodic, have to most strongly second the recommendation of Edward Bast: The third piano concerto and the Concerto for Orchestra, which are also the two Bartok pieces which _just happen to top the most popular lists_ where this composer's works are concerned -- _Wow, what a coincidence!_


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I admit that Concerto for Orchestra is one piece I've never been able to connect with. I have about 9 different versions, so I've certainly tried!


----------



## Korados (Aug 2, 2014)

mikey said:


> Harmonically, it's his middle stuff that is the most radical. Once in America, he toned it down and you end up with pieces like the Concerto for Orchestra and 3rd piano Concerto which are no where near as hard hitting as something like the Miraculous Mandarin.
> 
> If you want Romantic-type melody, go for the early stuff which is Strauss/Liszt influenced. The Scherzo for piano and orchestra is a strange piece, quite un-Bartokian in the common sense but has wonderful orchestration and a number of 'big tunes'.


Thank you for this comment! Yes, I observed that his middle period certainly was mixed up by World War II.

I listened to the first 25 of the 44 Duos now and I don't know if I really like them. How can I define what I mean?
In his Romanian Dances, there is something unique which I can't hear in his other works.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Korados said:


> Thank you for this comment! Yes, I observed that his middle period certainly was mixed up by World War II.
> 
> I listened to the first 25 of the 44 Duos now and I don't know if I really like them. How can I define what I mean?
> In his Romanian Dances, there is something unique which I can't hear in his other works.


Those duos have a peculiar history. They were commissioned by an amateur player. (This part it seems I have wrong, it was a violinist / teacher who commissioned them see post #26, below.) After the first set was completed and he had tried them with his students, he went back to Bartók and told him he needed some less difficult, and he asked for a second set, which he also found too difficult for his purposes, so he commissioned yet another set, the third, more at the technical level he had initially wanted for his students-- the higher the duos' numbering, the simpler they become.  Keep going!
[[ADD: @ the OP -- it seems that the first, or later editions, have these in order of difficulty from simplest to most difficult. That being the case, they will get a bit more complex, both musically and in configurations for the violinists. Still, anything as good as these, your taste or not, deserves, I think, your time listening through.]]

You might find more in the area of your liking in these:
The _Hungarian Folk Songs_ for mixed choir (these might be arrangements of the originals for girls chorus --see further below.)




There are also a number of wonderful songs for acapella girls choir, which I can not find on youtube. One older (very fine recording) of them has the Bartók songs, and some other songs by Zoltán Kodály, here is one of the Kodály pieces, _Mountain Nights_ _(it is gorgeous)_




The Bartók songs are of course, more 'Bartókian,' but in a similar vein.

For piano, try:
_Fifteen Hungarian Peasant Songs_








The _Six Dances in Bulgarian Rhythm_ from his _Microkosmos, book VI_
Even these may be thornier than what you care for, but do give them a try, each of them are pretty brief.





P.s. Straight-ahead simple folk-like or popular / folk melody, and not very complex arrangements thereof, is I think what you want to hear, and seek. Simples


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Korados said:


> Thank you for this comment! Yes, I observed that his middle period certainly was mixed up by World War II.
> 
> I listened to the first 25 of the 44 Duos now and I don't know if I really like them. How can I define what I mean?
> In his Romanian Dances, there is something unique which I can't hear in his other works.


No I don't care so much for the first two books, though 11 is interesting. They're didactic don't forget, like mikrokosmos, so as you move on, they get better. Above all, you need an inspired performance with music like that. There's one from Angela and Jenifer Chun on Harmonia Mundi.

What is always interesting about those duos is just the different ways Bartok used folkloric material, made folk music his own, and modern.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

mikey said:


> Harmonically, it's his middle stuff that is the most radical. Once in America, he toned it down and you end up with pieces like the Concerto for Orchestra and 3rd piano Concerto which are no where near as hard hitting as something like the Miraculous Mandarin.
> 
> If you want Romantic-type melody, go for the early stuff which is Strauss/Liszt influenced. The Scherzo for piano and orchestra is a strange piece, quite un-Bartokian in the common sense but has wonderful orchestration and a number of 'big tunes'.


Do we know why he sold out in America?


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

PetrB said:


> Those duos have a peculiar history. They were commissioned by an amateur player. After the first group, he went to Bartok and said they were too difficult, and asked for a second group, which were also too difficult, so he commissioned yet another group, the third, more at his technical level -- the higher the duos numbering, the simpler they become.  Keep going![/FONT]


PetrB, I was under the impression that nos. III and IV of the four 'books' became progressively more advanced, not the other way around. Did Bartok compose the easier ones last and then the order was reversed when they were published?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Mandryka said:


> Do we know why he sold out in America?


I seem to remember that his Third Concerto was written for his wife. The Concerto for Orchestra was a Boston Symphony commission, and he may have wanted to provide something that was more immediately appealing.

I don't see it as selling out, though, as he never turned to writing hackwork; perhaps his tastes simply changed and he felt compelled to write in a lighter style. Perhaps, too, his lack of success had something to do with it.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

elgars ghost said:


> PetrB, I was under the impression that nos. III and IV of the four 'books' became progressively more advanced, not the other way around. Did Bartok compose the easier ones last and then the order was reversed when they were published?


It seems so, though _it turns out I may have part of it wrong: they were requested / commissioned by Erich Dorfein, a German violinist and teacher._ I did hear a violinist / teacher who presented them (with one of her students) say that the difficulty level was indeed in the order I described. This has it as still very possible that Erich Dorfein, who commissioned them, kept requesting these works intended for students (another kind of amatuer  and the sets were too difficult for a particular level he hoped to have material for, ergo the descending vs. ascending order of difficulty as they were composed.

The duos were composed over the course of the year 1931, during which Bartók was also occupied with that other pedagogical set of pieces, the Microkosmos. As methodical and progressive as works like this seem, there is no real proof, unless each piece is singly dated on the manuscript, that any such work is written in front-to-back order. Often enough, when they are done, either composer and or editor will sort through and determine the final order (and number of pieces included) just prior sending them off to the engraver.

I've hunted for that link with the player (a teacher, with her student) who did explain the order of composition as from the most difficult to the least. It may be down now, or 'pages' back on youtube's listing of the piece, as it has been about two years since I last watched it. If I run across it, I will happily send you the link.

I'm certain when they were published for release to a general public that unusual order of creation would not fit the standard expectations of a set of somewhat pedagogical pieces or be understood, if not downright confuse any and all consumers. Original intentions, no matter the order of composition would naturally be for a progressive order of simple to difficult, so no matter how they came out, the final ordering was done prior publication.

It is a fun, drole, and unusual history, no? Since they were commissioned, it also shows a composer completely willing to fit his skills to the skills of the players the works were commissioned by, much against many a romantic notion of composers writing 'whatever they want.'


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Mandryka said:


> Do we know why he sold out in America?


Will you call the 6th string quartet a "sell out piece" too?

Perhaps he felt more comfortable writing daring music when he himself felt more comfortable in general, in his homeland rather than in a strange new city.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

violadude said:


> Will you call the 6th string quartet a "sell out piece" too?
> 
> .


I don't know, I think it's an excellent question.


----------



## Alypius (Jan 23, 2013)

Mandryka said:


> Do we know why he sold out in America?


Presumption: He sold out.

That's quite an extraordinary claim. It is also extraordinarily insulting to an artist of Bartok's personal integrity. So, prove your claim.

BTW, If you don't happen like particular music, just say so. There is no need to insult artists just because they don't match one's quite subjective tastes. However, the decision to insult an artist is itself revealing of character.

As for the masterful 3rd Piano Concerto, Bartok wrote it, from what I've read, for his wife to make a living on -- he knew he could be dying. That fact, by the way, doesn't detract either from its virtuosity nor its beauty. As for the _Concerto for Orchestra_, I consider it one of the finest works of the 20th century.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

violadude said:


> Will you call the 6th string quartet a "sell out piece" too?
> 
> *Perhaps he felt more comfortable writing daring music when he himself felt more comfortable in general, in his homeland rather than in a strange new ci*ty.


That's pretty much the definition of selling out. I'm not saying he did. But to sell out is an urge to "fit it" when that uncomfortable sensation of being alone really makes it's presence known. That's what is so respectable about those pioneering composers who never bowed to this fear... they were compelled not to. A courageous decision.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> I don't see it as selling out, though, as he never turned to writing hackwork; perhaps his tastes simply changed and he felt compelled to write in a lighter style. Perhaps, too, his lack of success had something to do with it.


Bartok lived in very marginal circumstances in the US, though being a proud person he often refused gifts of money from friends. It would be very natural for any artist to try to reach a wider audience in those circumstances, and to hope for economic benefits. And Bartok was, after all, a professional composer.

"pro-fes-sion-al -- [pruh-fesh-uh-nl]
adjective
1. following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain."


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I always remember this melody occurring at about 13:00 in the first mvt of the Piano Concerto No. 1, because I first heard it on the prog-rock album_ Quatermass _in 1970. The quote appears at about 4:45 into the song _Make Up Your Mind.
_
http://youtu.be/s7unu1yCi4s


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

In response to the OP try the _Romanian Christmas Carols_.

As far as the "selling out" claim, I don't see how one can listen to the Concerto for Orchestra or 3rd PC and get the impression of lightweight or watered down pieces. Personally I find his middle period works more accessible, but I find my tastes often run opposite to the more "melody driven music" crowd.

I think Bartok's compositions retained a very high level of mastery and artistic expression to the end of his career, that is what is important. I think it is natural to expect a bit of a change of style when a composer moves to completely new surroundings. Its completely possible he was trying to reach a wider audience by writing in a different style but at the end of the day that is just speculation. I don't think that in itself is a negative thing anyway, as long as the sincerity and artistic expression in the work isn't compromised. Deep down I think almost all composers want to reach a larger audience. Not all composers have the luxury of writing for a "future audience" - sometime after they're dead.

Personally, I think it is more interesting when composers diversify and try different things anyway. That is one of the things I value most in a composer - those who can be diverse and dynamic. That is one of the main reasons why I consider Stravinsky one of the greatest composers of all time, and I certainly don't think he was "selling-out" in any way when he went through his neo-classical phase.


----------



## Korados (Aug 2, 2014)

I just browsed through my music archive and noticed that I have a Complete Edition of Bartok!  I totally forgot this one.
The Choral works and his opera is very nice. In fact, the opera was the first work I heard from him. But I don't know the Hungarian language... 

Mikrokosmos is very interesting. I have the score of this work and it always fascinated me.

I don't know if I seek simplicity, just this feeling that someone really cared for the music to be recogniseable.

Do you know this video?




This is what I mean. I was completely stunned by this video. People listening to music, just like is was played by a street musician from the get-go... Maybe I want simple, after all. I also love the BBC Proms. People that are excited about classical music, just like the youths who are excited about popular music.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Vesuvius said:


> That's pretty much the definition of selling out. I'm not saying he did. But to sell out is an urge to "fit it" when that uncomfortable sensation of being alone really makes it's presence known. That's what is so respectable about those pioneering composers who never bowed to this fear... they were compelled not to. A courageous decision.


Good lord you're just too casual with words and conclusions with words, my man. lol.

It is not selling out if a master composer wisely chooses a more uncluttered and simpler vocabulary to better secure an audience and an income for himself and his future widow and heirs. There _is_ selling out if of a sudden you do a 180-degree turnabout and produce cheesy music of far lesser quality and complexity as you were used to doing, neither of which this composer did. He did not give it up wholesale and write, under a pseudonym, a television ad ditty, a quickly tossed off film score, nor did he do anything like drop his entire manner of comping to turn about and compose quasi-classical ditties in a 'lite classical' mode.

I find the pieces less interesting, and yes, a little pitched to an audience to be more easily taken in, and less 'problematical' for that audience, so I prefer them less because of that simpler vocabulary, while I do not think they are at all 'lesser' on the compositional front. The two pieces in question are no more of a 'sellout,' than Beethoven's _ninth symphony Finale_, prompted, bought and paid for by a windfall commission which fell in his lap while he was working upon that symphony, with no choral finale originally planned that we have evidence of until that commission came in, and that movement is soooo obviously aimed at a wide audience, with its calculatedly simple thematic hooks and near guaranteed magnetic draw of its also simple text plus about every theatrically sensational bit of schtick he could pack in to that last movement (is that selling your body to the customer, your soul to the devil?)

Hindemith's _Variations on a theme of Carl Maria von Weber,_ could be considered a pandering to the lower common denominator, and many another work 'tuned' by a composer for a more popular audience (_Die Zauberflöte_, anyone?) without for a moment the composers having dropped the level of their craft. So they were shrewd, and wrote a piece they knew would be more widely popular which could widen their reputation and better give them income.

That is not (in the face of a number of those most popular works being both popular, and also considered masterworks by the less than popular 'musical establishment,') selling out, that is a genius craftsman using their own judgment, able to limit their vocabulary without diminishing the strengths of their work.

An Einaudi does a volte face after a full early life of writing in a vein enough to be of interest as a master student or post grad level composer to Berio, and then immediately thereafter turns to comping easy-peasy quasi-classical ditties in a new-agish vein enough to sell wildly well with pre-and post pubescent teen females // a Korngold (out of dire necessity to survive) turns to writing music for films which is a parody of his former self, formulaic, back to back, fat checks for each. // A Karl Jenkins, (lord only knows I don't think one is happily given passing marks in any decent music school or conservatory writing what he does post schooling -- though who knows, maybe he passed but that music he writes now is _really who he is?_) is more a sellout from the get-go, his original music sounding already like a parody of something, pandering to the near lowest common denonimator // Maybe writing the score for _The Red Violin_ had far more to do with a big fat check than artistic integrity. // All of those are more in the arena of 'sellout,' -- and I very much include Beethoven here -- than anything Bartok ever penned.

Just because a composer calculatedly uses a simpler melodic / harmonic vocabulary for one or two pieces doesn't mean anything in itself. The disappointment some have in those pieces using that simpler vocabulry, which I have a bit, is really the obverse side of the coin of someone wishing that composers today wrote more like Mendelssohn, i.e. it is expecting the composer to comply to our whims. This is weird, because the works of so many composers so many love and admire came about because they were not catering to anyone's whims except perhaps their private muse


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Good grief, you're way too abundant with your words, my man. I explicitly said that I didn't think Bartok sold out. I was directly referring to violadude's explanation as to what he thought Bartok was doing. Which is still very limited in its scope.

I agree with most of what you've said. But it's founded on a vast miscalculation on where I was coming from.


----------



## FLighT (Mar 7, 2013)

One of my favorite Bartok works is "The Music for Strings, Percussion, and Celeste", especially the 1st and 3rd movements. The short first movement melody is worked to perfection in a fugue like manner that builds to a shattering climax and then it reverses course and returns to its point of beginning, fading slowly, quietly away.

The 3rd movement is magical, mist shrouded, downright spooky at times. I've heard other works that attempt to call up the mood and atmosphere and sense that something isn't quite right (don't look back over your shoulders) that Bartok gives us here, but none that I can think of are quite this effective.

And the 2nd and 4th movements contrast nicely with 1 and 3.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Bartok's more accessible - basically, his less dissonant - late works are as masterly as any he wrote. This "selling" out business is snobbery. Did Beethoven "sell out" when he followed his fifth symphony with the "Pastoral"? Did Wagner "sell out" when he followed _Tristan_ with _Meistersinger_? Should we look down at people who enjoy the latter two works more than the former two? Evidently we should. Clearly Wagner should have realized that he was pushing tonality to a new frontier, done the manly thing, and changed his name to Arnold.

Note that the poster of this thread asks for music which is "melodi_ous_," and then specifies further "tonal and melodious," as he characterizes the Romanian Dances. It's very cute to answer by saying that all Bartok's music is melod_ic_. Well, of course it is. Strictly speaking, any tone row that no mailman will ever whistle (unless he's a graduate of Juilliard who can't find a gig) is melod_ic_. This, of course, is not what melodi_ous_ means to a person who plainly finds much of Bartok not melodious enough. It's more than likely that such a person will, with sufficient exposure to complex music, come to appreciate fully the richness of Bartok's melodic inspiration, if he doesn't already. But at the moment he finds certain works more pleasingly melodious, and wants to know if there are others comparable to them. Fair enough.

I think we all know what "melodious" music is. It's music in which the melody is conspicuous, even predominant, easy to grasp, memorable, and pleasing. What's melodious for one person may not be for another; various factors may contribute to this difference of perception. It's not only the shape of a melody itself that causes it to imprint itself on the mind; the harmonic underpinning of a melody can make a great difference to whether a person finds the music memorable and affecting - melodi_ous_- or not, and this I take to be the significance of the poster's phrase "tonal and melodious" (I would hope now that no one is about to come down on him for using the term "tonal" imprecisely or loosely.)

Bartok is a difficult composer for a lot of people. I know I've come to him slowly. I look forward to getting back to the quartets and seeing whether being a few years closer to death enhances my enjoyment!


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Vesuvius said:


> Good grief, you're way too abundant with your words, my man. I explicitly said that I didn't think Bartok sold out. I was directly referring to violadude's explanation as to what he thought Bartok was doing. Which is still very limited in its scope.
> 
> I agree with most of what you've said. But it's founded on a vast miscalculation on where I was coming from.


Well, sorry, but the way you put it read more than ambiguously, and though you said you thought Bartok did not sell out, the rest of that text body seems to me riddled with implications he did. Maybe run it by a neutral party and see what they think of it? LOL. No, they would have to read near the whole damned thread... you'd have to pay someone to do that  I will toss in, truthfully, that I've been awake far too loong, and could be well off anything near quick or sharp... 'struth. I should really back away from the computer and get some sleep, but don't want to do that now and wake up at 3 a.m. even if.... _zzzzzzzzzzz_


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

PetrB said:


> Well, sorry, but the way you put it read more than ambiguously, and though you said you thought Bartok did not sell out, the rest of that text body seems to me riddled with implications he did. Maybe run it by a neutral party and see what they think of it? LOL. No, they would have to read near the whole damned thread... you'd have to pay someone to do that  I will toss in, truthfully, that I've been awake far too loong, and could be well off anything near quick or sharp... 'struth. I should really back away from the computer and get some sleep, but don't want to do that now and wake up at 3 a.m. even if.... _zzzzzzzzzzz_


Whoa, are you saying you're sorry? You must be tired. Get some rest, will ya'. 

But yes, I was aiming at general terminology rather trying to break apart Bartok's integrity. I love Bartok. Which is why I said before I continued - "I'm not saying he did" - in reference to selling out.


----------



## Korados (Aug 2, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Note that the poster of this thread asks for music which is "melodi_ous_," and then specifies further "tonal and melodious," as he characterizes the Romanian Dances. It's very cute to answer by saying that all Bartok's music is melod_ic_.


Yeah, that's pretty much my intention. Of course there are melodies in every of Bartok's works but there aren't such smashing and significant tonal melodies like the Romanien Dances. When I listen to these, it seems to be a much different Bartok, like he was in a different mood in the time he wrote these pieces.



FLighT said:


> The 3rd movement is magical, mist shrouded, downright spooky at times. I've heard other works that attempt to call up the mood and atmosphere and sense that something isn't quite right (don't look back over your shoulders) that Bartok gives us here, but none that I can think of are quite this effective.


Oh, I can give you a listening tip: Listen to the second movement of Ginastera's Violin Concerto. It has just the same "vibe" as Bartok's work.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> I think we all know what "melodious" music is. It's music in which the melody is conspicuous, even predominant, easy to grasp, memorable, and pleasing. What's melodious for one person may not be for another; various factors may contribute to this difference of perception. It's not only the shape of a melody itself that causes it to imprint itself on the mind; the harmonic underpinning of a melody can make a great difference to whether a person finds the music memorable and affecting - melodi_ous_- or not, and this I take to be the significance of the poster's phrase "tonal and melodious" (I would hope now that no one is about to come down on him for using the term "tonal" imprecisely or loosely.)
> 
> Bartok is a difficult composer for a lot of people. I know I've come to him slowly. I look forward to getting back to the quartets and seeing whether being a few years closer to death enhances my enjoyment!


Ya, but there's still a level of subjectivity to it, nevertheless. For example, the first time I heard the first movement of the 2nd piano concerto I was hooked on the melody. I loved it. One of the posters on here recently just heard the same thing and it caused him to call Bartok "tone deaf". I was shocked that he didn't enjoy those delightful tunes, quite honestly.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

The first Bartok melody I heard was from the opening movement of the 3rd piano concerto. But I heard it on a live recording by Frank Zappa. His band was playing this, as well as Stravinsky's Royal Marche on the 1988 tour. I was fortunate to attend one of the shows. Zappa did a beautiful job editing and created a medley of the Stravinsky segueing into the Bartok piano melody. It made my hair stand up, so I went out and bought the piano concertos by Gyorgy Sandor. You can hear it on the first half of this video.






Thanks to FZ for turning me onto a lot of great music!


----------



## Alypius (Jan 23, 2013)

violadude said:


> Ya, but there's still a level of subjectivity to it, nevertheless. For example, the first time I heard the first movement of the 2nd piano concerto I was hooked on the melody. I loved it. One of the posters on here recently just heard the same thing and it caused him to call Bartok "tone deaf". I was shocked that he didn't enjoy those delightful tunes, quite honestly.


violadude, What hooked me was the 2nd movement of the 2nd Concerto. Those opening chords: some of the thickest, most mesmerizing, most mystery-invoking chords I've ever heard (Ligeti's got a few that rival them). I kept playing it over and over when I first heard it. I had owned a performance back in the mid 70s, but around 2005 I remember purchasing the Boulez performance with three different pianists (Krystian Zimerman for #1, Leif Ove Andsnes for #2, and Helene Grimaud for #3). Boulez was able to get sounds out of that orchestra that I had never heard before, esp. in the 2nd Concerto and esp. in the 2nd movement. While I've studied the score of the 6 Quartets, I've never examined the score of the Concertos. Note to self: Order score.


----------



## Alypius (Jan 23, 2013)

This is Chris Boyes' discussion of Piano Concerto #2 (from the (_All Music Guide_)

"His previous effort in the genre, the Piano Concerto No. 1 (1926), is somewhat thornier in its idiom and technical demands, and had not to that point enjoyed much popularity. Since Bartók wrote most of his piano music for his own use as a performer throughout Europe and the United States, it seems natural that he would have wanted a work with more universal appeal. Though Bartók completed the Second Concerto in October 1931, it was not premiered until January 23, 1933 -- an especially notable event, since this marked the last time he ever appeared in soon-to-be Nazified Germany.

In approaching the composition of his Second Concerto, Bartók made a conscious effort to limit the difficulty of the solo and the orchestral parts. The latter aspect had proven particularly troublesome in the First Concerto -- so much so, in fact, that the New York Philharmonic, which was to have given the premiere, could not master it in time, and another work had to be substituted on the program. The composer himself acknowledged that the piano part was arduous and later said that the concerto "is a bit difficult -- one might even say very difficult! -- as much for orchestra as for audience." He evidently learned the lesson well, since the Second Concerto has enjoyed both critical acclaim and worldwide popularity.

The overall form of the Second Concerto is symmetrical -- the tempo structure is fast-slow-fast-slow-fast -- in the Bartókian manner that has come to be identified as arch form. The first movement, marked Allegro, is highlighted by the active, punctuating piano solo. The piano's quick, rhythmic pace and fragmentary scalar movement suggest the influence of Stravinsky, and the ballet Petrushka (1910-1911) in particular. The concerto's instrumentation similarly betrays Bartók's affinity with Stravinsky, as the string section remains silent for the entire first movement -- a characteristic which also reflects an increasing emphasis on the wind and percussion sections of the orchestra in the early decades of the twentieth century. Sections of neo-Bachian counterpoint may also reflect Stravinsky's influence.

The strings make their entrance at the beginning of the Adagio second movement. Markedly different from its predecessor, this central movement begins with a slow chorale stated by the strings in stacked perfect fifths. After this first chorale section, the piano enters, accompanied only by timpani -- a striking, unusual instrumental pairing that readily illustrates Bartók's frequent employment of the piano as an extension of the percussion family. The middle section of this movement, signalled by a change to a Presto tempo, is extremely quick and light. The movement is rounded out by a return to the original slow tempo and the reappearance of motives from the beginning of the movement. The third movement is a free variation of the first and is similar in pace and melodic shape."


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Or listen to Kodaly or Enescu perhaps?


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Alypius said:


> violadude, What hooked me was the 2nd movement of the 2nd Concerto. Those opening chords: some of the thickest, most mesmerizing, most mystery-invoking chords I've ever heard (Ligeti's got a few that rival them). I kept playing it over and over when I first heard it.


I discovered the work in my teens. I was completely, utterly, entirely blown away. I well remember listening to the work with head phones, lying in bed and looking out the window at the stars - those eerie strings seemed to go perfectly with the vast coldness of space.

Selling out? Not until we discover Bartok had been secretly writing songs for Justin Bieber.


----------



## mikey (Nov 26, 2013)

Alypius said:


> In approaching the composition of his Second Concerto, Bartók made a conscious effort to limit the difficulty of the solo and the orchestral parts. The latter aspect had proven particularly troublesome in the First Concerto -- so much so, in fact, that the New York Philharmonic, which was to have given the premiere, could not master it in time, and another work had to be substituted on the program. The composer himself acknowledged that the piano part was arduous and later said that the concerto "is a bit difficult -- one might even say very difficult! -- as much for orchestra as for audience." He evidently learned the lesson well, since the Second Concerto has enjoyed both critical acclaim and worldwide popularity.


Given the second is generally considered one of the hardest in the rep, I'd say he failed on that front.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Alypius said:


> violadude, What hooked me was the 2nd movement of the 2nd Concerto. Those opening chords: some of the thickest, most mesmerizing, most mystery-invoking chords I've ever heard (Ligeti's got a few that rival them). I kept playing it over and over when I first heard it. I had owned a performance back in the mid 70s, but around 2005 I remember purchasing the Boulez performance with three different pianists (Krystian Zimerman for #1, Leif Ove Andsnes for #2, and Helene Grimaud for #3). Boulez was able to get sounds out of that orchestra that I had never heard before, esp. in the 2nd Concerto and esp. in the 2nd movement. While I've studied the score of the 6 Quartets, I've never examined the score of the Concertos. Note to self: Order score.


The second concerto is especially a masterpiece, imo.

Bartók was a great concert pianist. A good deal of his bread and butter came from concertizing, mainly in recital. He was especially renowned for his deeply intelligent and compelling rendering of Beethoven, whose music he knew and deeply understood inside out.

If you listen to the middle movement of Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 4




you will find many direct similarities between that and the middle movement of Bartók's second concerto, none of them in any way accidental. The same sort of incredible tensions set up between the two characteristically contrasting elements, and many other less immediate parallels are present in the middle movements of both concerti. Being Bartók, there is no sense of its being anything but Bartók, but he certainly knew how to take a premise of great evocative and structural strengths and turn it completely to his own use and make it uniquely his own.

It is an incredibly tension laden-movement, disturbing and hauntingly beautiful with its alternating episodes of those dark and towering verticals and the then delicate _night music_ which are so unique to the composer.

A very fine earlier rendition and recording is to be had with pianist Rudolf Serkin. The piece, btw, is one of those handful of the entire concerto repertoire which are infamous among even the most capable of concert pianists for being a major endurance test to play through beginning to end, in anyone's more casual parlance, "a real bear."

Too, Bartók's deep knowledge and love of Beethoven in another genre is very apparent as model and springboard, that for the six quartets.

Great stuff!


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

PetrB said:


> The second concerto is especially a masterpiece, imo.
> 
> Bartók was a great concert pianist. A good deal of his bread and butter came from concertizing, mainly in recital. He was especially renowned for his deeply intelligent and compelling rendering of Beethoven, whose music he knew and deeply understood inside out.
> 
> ...


Thanks for posting this, because it made me understand something about my own response to the concerto. In truth I've never liked it much, and it maybe that the inspiration he took from Beethoven helps explain this - you see I'm don't much enjoy most of Beethoven's middle period music either. Making that connection helped to see what was going on with my own (bad) taste


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Mandryka said:


> Thanks for posting this, because it made me understand something about my own response to the concerto. In truth I've never liked it much, and it maybe that the inspiration he took from Beethoven helps explain this - you see I'm don't much enjoy most of Beethoven's middle period music either. Making that connection helped to see what was going on with my own (bad) taste


There is tremendous and truly great music by composers which just does not speak to me at all. I like to think, with that lifetime of training and conditioning to examine and evaluate music in general, and in an at least semi-detached way, that at least I understand _why_ I don't care for this composer or that piece. This is already miles ahead of many a listener and what they can think or verbalize. (That like and dislike can be based on a personal aesthetic, developed and clarified over time, and I have one of which I am also very aware -- my personal aesthetic eliminates -- nearly completely erases -- a good chunk of the post-mid to later romantics, lol.)

_I understand,_ and please don't ever feel the need to excuse your personal taste, even if it is not caring about any of the truly great, or those who are great and their greatness rep has become lionized to a point of hyperbolic and ridiculous 'reverence.' LOL.

Above all of it, _vive chacun à son goût!_


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

PetrB said:


> The second concerto is especially a masterpiece, imo.
> 
> Bartók was a great concert pianist. A good deal of his bread and butter came from concertizing, mainly in recital. He was especially renowned for his deeply intelligent and compelling rendering of Beethoven, whose music he knew and deeply understood inside out.
> 
> ...


Yes, I'm glad you pointed out the Beethoven influence, and I believe the "neo-Bachian" counterpoint Bartok often used in his works was influenced by none other than (who'd a thunk it?) Bach. I have no doubt Stravinsky was an influence, but I think in the greater sense the harmonic language both Stravinsky and Bartok were using at the time more directly originated with Debussy. The article Alypius posted makes it sound like everything in the work was directly influenced by Stravinsky.


----------



## FLighT (Mar 7, 2013)

brianvds said:


> ...Selling out? Not until we discover Bartok had been secretly writing songs for Justin Bieber.


:lol:

Well, this thread sent me to my music library this morning to listen to my first exposure to the MSPC many years ago with the ASMF under Marriner. I've also got the Boulez piano concertos in hand and will have to search out the Ginastera. I believe the only recording of his music I have (off the top of my head) is his "Popul Vuh".

As I type this I'm listening to the 2nd movement of Bartok's Divertimento, Molto Adagio, and hearing it's influence on Wojciech Kilars terrific score for Coppola's Bram Stokers Dracula.

One of the things I like best about TC and threads like this is how it gets me to revisit old favorites, re-enjoy them, and often get new insights and understanding. And, of course, there's always something I haven't heard to explore.

This CD also comes with a fun performance of Shostokovich's Piano Concerto #1 with John Ogden. Some nice trumpet work by John Wibraham too.That 4th movement is pure joy and a great way to start my day.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/518C2c53I5L._AA160_.jpg


----------



## Korados (Aug 2, 2014)

FLighT said:


> This CD also comes with a fun performance of Shostokovich's Piano Concerto #1 with John Ogden. Some nice trumpet work by John Wibraham too.That 4th movement is pure joy and a great way to start my day.


I like the second concerto better. You can really feel that Shostakovich was happy in the time he composed it. He wrote for his son Maxim for his 19th birthday. I read here and there that the piano concertos of him are minor works but I really think they deserve more attention.

I don't know the concertos of Bartok. I heard the third piano concerto only once, and this was a long time ago. I can't really remember. He actually didn't finished it himself, right? The last 16 measures or so were written by a friend of Bartok.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Korados said:


> I like the second concerto better. You can really feel that Shostakovich was happy in the time he composed it. He wrote for his son Maxim for his 19th birthday. I read here and there that the piano concertos of him are minor works but I really think they deserve more attention.
> 
> I don't know the concertos of Bartok. I heard the third piano concerto only once, and this was a long time ago. I can't really remember. He actually didn't finished it himself, right? The last 16 measures or so were written by a friend of Bartok.


Close. He finished the score apart from the last few bars, but all that remained was orchestration.

The Viola Concerto was much farther away from completion, I believe.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

violadude said:


> Will you call the 6th string quartet a "sell out piece" too?
> .


No.

I've been listening to it all day, it sounds more agressively modern, much more, in the March for example, than the Concerto for Orchestra or the 3rd Piano Concerto. So, I don't hear any pandering to popular taste.


----------



## Korados (Aug 2, 2014)

Oh, I switched this around. Sorry.

Why are you talking about sell out pieces? I don't think Bartok made his music to cover a big audience at all.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> Close. He finished the score apart from the last few bars, but all that remained was orchestration.
> 
> The Viola Concerto was much farther away from completion, I believe.


Yes. Bartok left sketches at his death; his friend Tibor Serly completed it. As such, I cannot take the Bartok Viola Concerto seriously as authentic Bartok.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Mandryka said:


> No.
> 
> I've been listening to it all day, it sounds more agressively modern, much more, in the March for example, than the Concerto for Orchestra or the 3rd Piano Concerto. *So, I don't hear any pandering to popular taste.*


That is because there is no pandering, not in any of his works. The _Dance Suite_ composed in 1923 is in a similar vein to the _Concerto for Orchestra_, but is even more simplistic. Some of his early pieces like the _Piano Quintet_ are quite Romantic in sound. Bartok composed in multiple ways throughout his career. To single out the last 2 pieces as being somehow untrue to his style, is a very simplistic and naive view based on pure speculation, and is incorrect.


----------



## Alypius (Jan 23, 2013)

tdc said:


> That is because there is no pandering, not in any of his works. The _Dance Suite_ composed in 1923 is in a similar vein to the _Concerto for Orchestra_, but is even more simplistic. Some of his early pieces like the _Piano Quintet_ are quite Romantic in sound. Bartok composed in multiple ways throughout his career. To single out the last 2 pieces as being somehow untrue to his style, is a very simplistic and naive view based on pure speculation, and is incorrect.


Thank you. That needed to be said.

How could anyone possibly describe Bartok as "pandering"? But I need only read to see that they do. I don't know how to deal with smug and unsubstantiated aesthetic judgments -- other than put such people on "ignore" which, sadly, I find myself doing more and more. What is the purpose of such negativism? Self-aggrandizement? I can understand that someone might not enjoy certain composers or certain works. Just say so. Just say: "that doesn't appeal to me" or "I can't make sense of that." Music criticism based on substantive evidence and technical analysis is fine, indeed, is extremely helpful. On the other hand, unsubstantiated pontification is not.

The other day, science responded to someone who spoke of "hating" certain music:



> I guess I just don't understand using the word "hate" in this kind of situation. To hate some kind of music is inevitably and precisely to hate the people who make it and enjoy it. I can't see a reason to do that. What's at stake that would require us to have such strong feelings about it?


I would hope that we can find ways of speaking of what we do not enjoy in less flamboyant language, less caustic self-expressions. It is against the "terms of service" to use _ad hominems_. Fine and good. And yet I regularly see _ad hominems_ used against composers -- and by implication, any who enjoy their music. I can't understand why people seem to be unable to temper their speech in a way that recognizes that there are other people in the world.

tdc, you are much more patient than I.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Korados said:


> I don't know the concertos of Bartok. I heard the third piano concerto only once, and this was a long time ago. I can't really remember. He actually didn't finished it himself, right? The last 16 measures or so were written by a friend of Bartok.


Do yourself a favour and give his piano concertos a listen.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Rhapsody For Piano & Orchestra is a delightful piece.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bartok Violin Concerto #2 is melodic from first note to last.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Bartok Violin Concerto #2 is melodic from first note to last.


There are exquisite melodies in the first one, as well. In fact, they're all over the place in his work. Not always his own, but still.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Blancrocher said:


> There are exquisite melodies in the first one, as well. In fact, they're all over the place in his work. Not always his own, but still.


The opening melody of movement 2 of violin concerto #2 is achingly beautiful.


----------

