# Your Favorite Century For Piano Concerto



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Which century features most of your favorite piano concertos? Let's assume the genre started in the great 18th century and continues to the present day.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Although the great 18th century features most of my favorite piano concertos, the current century does have good examples, such as Alma Deustcher's pinao concerto.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Welcome back!

Personal favourites range from Bach to Rautavaara, but aside from Mozart more in the romantic period than in others.


----------



## David Phillips (Jun 26, 2017)

Bach and Mozart wrote my favourite piano concertos.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

For me, the 20th century just beats out the 19th by a nose. Those Russians--Rachmaninoff, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Khachaturian--when added to Ravel, Bartók, Hovhaness, Martinů, Rautavaara, Poulenc, threw the decision over to the later century. Beethoven, Brahms, and Schumann fought valiantly but in the end were overwhelmed by superior numbers.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> Although the great 18th century features most of my favorite piano concertos, the current century does have good examples, such as Alma Deustcher's pinao concerto.


Given that Alma's piano concerto is thoroughly derivative, it's a poor example of a 21st century work.


----------



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

I like PCs from the classical era onwards but I vote 20th c. mainly because the music in general from that century (or even the first half of it) had more variety.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

Which Bach? JS Bach never wrote a piano concerto.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

classical yorkist said:


> Which Bach? JS Bach never wrote a piano concerto.


I'm not a purist. I prefer JSB's concertos on piano rather than harpsichord.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

Art Rock said:


> I'm not a purist. I prefer JSB's concertos on piano rather than harpsichord.


Perhaps so but he never wrote a piano concerto


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Make sure you inform all CD labels of this as well.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Bulldog said:


> Given that Alma's piano concerto is thoroughly derivative, it's a poor example of a 21st century work.


true - though she is better known than many truly accomPlished 21stC comPosers


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I'm not a fan of piano concertos in general, but the 1700s produced some really fine ones, at least to my taste.


----------



## Littlephrase (Nov 28, 2018)

Easily the 20th century for me, for both the names Strange Magic mentioned, along with others like Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Ginastera, Medtner, Atterberg, Lutoslawski, Ligeti, Schnittke and many more I’m surely forgetting. The preceding two centuries obviously hold riches, but not quite the same variety as the 20th.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Bulldog said:


> Given that Alma's piano concerto is thoroughly derivative, it's a poor example of a 21st century work.


Whom would you say Alma is imitating? Do you think it is possible to create great music whilst being derivative?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

janxharris said:


> Do you think it is possible to create great music whilst being derivative?


Definitely. Do you consider Alma's piano concerto great music?


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Bulldog said:


> Definitely. Do you consider Alma's piano concerto great music?


I didn't like Alma's work, no (though that's based on a few hearings of the first few minutes). I find it derivative too.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

janxharris said:


> I didn't like Alma's work, no (though that's based on a few hearings of the first few minutes). I find it derivative too.


It may not be interesting work to serious listeners - but there is a market for what she is doing in classical music.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

stomanek said:


> It may not be interesting work to serious listeners - but there is a market for what she is doing in classical music.


Indeed - but she seems to be taken quite seriously by composer and musicologist Ron Weidberg - who said (from wikipedia):

_"Alma's most important talent is the perfect connection between her inner world and the melodies she creates, which are so beautiful because they stem directly from this inner world. Few composers can write such tunes, which from the first moment are immediately impressed upon our memory, and thus turn into the possession of all those who listen to them. Alma is one of these composers, and this is why we are confident that the melodies she is writing now will remain with us even when we ourselves no longer remain the same as we were."_


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

I wonder if Alma's music would have received the same interest if she were older?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

janxharris said:


> Indeed - but she seems to be taken quite seriously by composer and musicologist Ron Weidberg - who said (from wikipedia):
> 
> _"Alma's most imortant talent is the perfect connection between her inner world and the melodies she creates, which are so beautiful because they stem directly from this inner world. Few composers can write such tunes, which from the first moment are immediately impressed upon our memory, and thus turn into the possession of all those who listen to them. Alma is one of these composers, and this is why we are confident that the melodies she is writing now will remain with us even when we ourselves no longer remain the same as we were."_


he is saying she has a meldodic gift - thats all

she's a child - we wont really know what the academics truly think until she grows to maturity


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Bulldog said:


> Given that Alma's piano concerto is thoroughly derivative, it's a poor example of a 21st century work.


Of course it's derivative - so was Mozart's music at her age! The fact is it's quite remarkable that a kid of her age can compose music like that anyway. I just hope that the Novelty seekers don't kill her talent.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> he is saying she has a meldodic gift - thats all
> 
> she's a child - we wont really know what the academics truly think until she grows to maturity


Frankly I couldn't care less what the academics think. I don't think Beethoven or Mozart cared particularly what the academics thought of them. what I'm interested in is someone to give us music that we can enjoy which seems to be a very short supply in the world of modern classical composers. My heart always sinks when I hear the words 'New commission' as you know it's likely to be a tuneless racket! Just hope with this kid the academics don't get hold of her and knock the musicality out of her!


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

janxharris said:


> Indeed - but she seems to be taken quite seriously by composer and musicologist Ron Weidberg - who said (from wikipedia):
> 
> _"*Alma's most important talent is the perfect connection between her inner world and the melodies she creates, which are so beautiful because they stem directly from this inner world. Few composers can write such tunes, *which from the first moment are immediately impressed upon our memory, and thus turn into the possession of all those who listen to them. Alma is one of these composers, and this is why we are confident that the melodies she is writing now will remain with us even when we ourselves no longer remain the same as we were."_


PR nonsense based on a popular image of what a composer does. The only reason she is popular is because the music requires no effort to listen to, is very familiar and is written by a kid....great talent for sure and I for one hopes she goes on to find a voice of her own - now _that_ might be worth listening to. But for now I'll stick with the guys who wrote like this a few years back and bought it to a peak of achievement.
All composers worth anything will be writing music that "stems directly from their inner world" and many composers who go through common practice academia actually _can_ write tunes that are decent enough to be called pastiche and in some cases probably better than Deutcher.

Before any potential panning by anybody here, I should just add that this is not anything against Deutscher, she is simply brilliant imv and I hope the publicity does not impede or limit her vision by restricting its breadth to just what the public wants or expects. It is entirely a rejoinder to the Weidberg quote and one which all composers will understand.

I realise I have gone off-topic so apologies to the OP.


----------



## samm (Jul 4, 2011)

Voted for 'all centuries', but in general I like 20th century concertos and a fair range of 19th century ones. 

Regarding Alma Deutscher, she is being used as a pawn in a never-ending debate about what the future of classical music should be. This may have a negative impact upon her as the angry traditionalists claim her as theirs and the modernist fans dismiss her as a pastiche artist. She's putting music out there so it will be critiqued, but it's best to see what she becomes later in life. A time will come when her music will either develop or fizzle-out as a childhood phenomenon.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

All centuries too. I am very blessed at being able to enjoy a wide range of music.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

samm said:


> Voted for 'all centuries', but in general I like 20th century concertos and a fair range of 19th century ones.
> 
> Regarding Alma Deutscher, she is being used as a pawn in a never-ending debate about what the future of classical music should be. This may have a negative impact upon her as the angry traditionalists claim her as theirs and the modernist fans dismiss her as a pastiche artist. *She's putting music out there so it will be critiqued*, but it's best to see what she becomes later in life. A time will come when her music will either develop or fizzle-out as a childhood phenomenon.


I think it depends on who is doing the critique. Don't forget Grove memorably said Rachmaninov would be forgotten within a generation! :lol:


----------



## samm (Jul 4, 2011)

DavidA said:


> I think it depends on who is doing the critique. Don't forget Grove memorably said Rachmaninov would be forgotten within a generation! :lol:


That's more or less what I wrote. It's better to forget predictions and see what transpires. Neither the traditionalists looking for a representation of popular, successful traditionalism as a weapon against newer trends, nor the modernists writing-off someone before they are full-grown should hold any authority until the history is written.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I don't know how you choose between the works of different centuries - they attempt such different thing - but I voted 18th Century because that was the time when the piano concerto genre really flourished.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Looks like Mozart is out in front


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Along with many from CPE Bach and a two or three from Haydn.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> Along with many from CPE Bach and a two or three from Haydn.


maybe -

without Mozart though I would be voting 19thC mainly on the merits of a dozen masterworks


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

If I had voted 18th century (which I didn't), the sole reason would have been Mozart.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

There may well be Poor" examples of music for every century. Alma is writing great music reaching out to many listeners today. For that she is making a difference to 21st century music with that piano concerto.

As for Bach, yes you could include his harpsichord concertos.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Art Rock said:


> Welcome back!
> 
> Personal favourites range from Bach to Rautavaara, but aside from Mozart more in the romantic period than in others.


Thanks! You have a broad appreciation of music.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

ArtMusic said:


> There may well be Poor" examples of music for every century. Alma is writing great music reaching out to many listeners today. For that she is making a difference to 21st century music with that piano concerto.
> 
> As for Bach, yes you could include his harpsichord concertos.


I wonder how many folk she is reaching out to know the established canon of concertos.

I take no pride in admitting I dont know certain must know works like prokofiev piano concertos. I would need to go through all those works by established masters before I could even start to justify listening to Alma.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I don't like a lot of piano / keyboard concerti. I rarely listen to Beethoven's, I never listen to Mozart's. I've never listened to Haydn's. Chronologically, the oldest piano concerti I listen to, although not often, are Schumann's and Grieg's. I listen to the Rachmaninov and Shostakovich piano concerti the most often, a few times a year. And I really like the Prokofiev Third Piano Concerto. The two Shostakovich piano concerti really seem to take advantage of the percussive nature of the piano, in my opinion of course. 

And maybe that's why I don't listen to many piano concerti: the piano is a percussion instrument trying to play with legato instruments. Every wind and string instrument of the orchestra can get louder as they play a single note, except the piano and other percussion instruments, they can only diminish. You have to wonder if the first Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto could be played with a hammer?

(BTW, I have no intention of ever listening to the Alma Deutscher. I'm sure it'll sound like the very pieces I don't want to listen to.)


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

senza sordino said:


> I don't like a lot of piano / keyboard concerti. I rarely listen to Beethoven's, I never listen to Mozart's. I've never listened to Haydn's. Chronologically, the oldest piano concerti I listen to, although not often, are Schumann's and Grieg's. I listen to the Rachmaninov and Shostakovich piano concerti the most often, a few times a year. And I really like the Prokofiev Third Piano Concerto. The two Shostakovich piano concerti really seem to take advantage of the percussive nature of the piano, in my opinion of course.
> 
> And maybe that's why I don't listen to many piano concerti: the piano is a percussion instrument trying to play with legato instruments. *Every wind and string instrument of the orchestra can get louder as they play a single note, except the piano and other percussion instruments, they can only diminish.* You have to wonder if the first Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto could be played with a hammer?
> 
> (BTW, I have no intention of ever listening to the Alma Deutscher. I'm sure it'll sound like the very pieces I don't want to listen to.)


whats the issue with that

the piano covers a greater range of notes than any wind instrument


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

The concerto is probably my least favorite major genre but I like some from all eras. Definitely prefer the concertos of the 20th century, particularly Prokofiev, Bartok, Barber, Schnittke, Rachmaninoff, Shostakovich.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

senza sordino said:


> And maybe that's why I don't listen to many piano concerti: the piano is a percussion instrument trying to play with legato instruments. Every wind and string instrument of the orchestra can get louder as they play a single note, except the piano and other percussion instruments, they can only diminish. You have to wonder if the first Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto could be played with a hammer?


The piano's contrast with the sustaining instruments is exactly what I DO like. It's also what I love about chamber music with piano against strings, and clearly Brahms and others loved it too, since they wrote some of their best music for that combination. Listening to a pianist like Rachmaninoff play his own concertos is to experience a kind of alchemy in which the piano's ability to sing yields nothing to any other instrument, but at the same time it adds to the ensemble an incisiveness and a scintillation unlike anything else.

I think it's in the 20th century that the combination of piano and orchestra fulfilled its potential, and that is my favorite century for the piano concerto. My favorite single piano concerto, though, is probably the Brahms first.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> My favorite single piano concerto, though, is probably the Brahms first.


And mine also. I don't know how it was possible for someone to compose that 2nd movement. And the first movement is both powerful and sublime. Few works have melodies that can compete with this Concerto. Sometimes I just feel like settling down and watching/listening to Helene Grimaud play it on YouTube.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

senza sordino said:


> I don't like a lot of piano / keyboard concerti. I rarely listen to Beethoven's, I never listen to Mozart's. I've never listened to Haydn's. Chronologically, the oldest piano concerti I listen to, although not often, are Schumann's and Grieg's. I listen to the Rachmaninov and Shostakovich piano concerti the most often, a few times a year. And I really like the Prokofiev Third Piano Concerto. The two Shostakovich piano concerti really seem to take advantage of the percussive nature of the piano, in my opinion of course.
> 
> And maybe that's why I don't listen to many piano concerti: the piano is a percussion instrument trying to play with legato instruments. Every wind and string instrument of the orchestra can get louder as they play a single note, except the piano and other percussion instruments, they can only diminish. *You have to wonder if the first Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto could be played with a hammer?*
> 
> (BTW, I have no intention of ever listening to the Alma Deutscher. I'm sure it'll sound like the very pieces I don't want to listen to.)


It can't be. Just for your information! :tiphat:


----------



## Littlephrase (Nov 28, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> My favorite single piano concerto, though, is probably the Brahms first.


Hmm, my single favorite piano concerto is the Brahms second. I guess that grumpy old bear from Hamburg was pretty good at composing.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Mozart's piano concertos are my favorites, hands down... and throwing in the bit by Haydn, CPE Bach, Beethoven's first two efforts, and J.S. Bach's keyboard concertos... I had to go with the 18th century. After that? The 19th century is the obvious contender: Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Brahms, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Hummel, Chopin, Grieg, Camille Saint-Saëns, Liszt, Rachmaninoff's 1st, Scharwenka, etc...


----------



## samm (Jul 4, 2011)

I wish Debussy had written a piano concerto.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

samm said:


> I wish Debussy had written a piano concerto.


He wrote this:


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

Since I don't listen to anything from earlier centuries, 20th century. Not even close.

Listening to Schoenberg piano concerto as I am typing this.

Maybe follow it up with Magnus Lindberg. Maybe Wourine


----------



## Swosh (Feb 25, 2018)

I think you're missing the fact that she's 11...


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Brahms's second still sounds great - love this version by Emil Gilels:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

janxharris said:


> Brahms's second still sounds great - love this version by Emil Gilels:


I prefer his earlier one with Reiner which is slightly faster and better accompanied.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Swosh said:


> I think you're missing the fact that she's 11...


Of course she is a phenomenon - but it's okay to focus purely on the strength or otherwise of a composers work without considering their age.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Swosh said:


> I think you're missing the fact that she's 11...


Time is moving on - she's now 14.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

ArtMusic said:


> Although the great 18th century features most of my favorite piano concertos, the current century does have good examples, such as Alma Deustcher's pinao concerto.


Reading what Alma has said I can agree with her statements: "Lots of people have been telling me that if I want to grow up, I have to compose music that will reflect the ugliness of the modern world. I don't want to do this. I want to compose music that I find beautiful." and "If the world is so ugly, then what's the point of making it even uglier with ugly music?"
Hearing some of the utterly unlistenable discordant stuff that comes over the radio that immediately has one reaching for the off switch one can only agree!


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

But..modern music doesn't _have_ to reflect ugliness, is not necessarily ugly and is only ugly to some classes of listener. For me it'd be one hell of a waste of talent for her _not_ to develop. This doesn't automatically mean atonality and unrecognisable pulse, modernity embraces many facets. One can always hope that she will have no choice in the matter as she matures and probes deeper, genius if it is there will out and become itself, not a clone stagnating within a style of writing that has been done.

I've said this before, but I also wonder if a stint in a top conservatoire amongst peers would be beneficial for her. The talent and ability of students in the best places would be quite a leveller for her, but will she even bother..?...does she need to?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

mikeh375 said:


> But..modern music doesn't _have_ to reflect ugliness, is not necessarily ugly and is only ugly to some classes of listener. For me it'd be one hell of a waste of talent for her _not_ to develop. This doesn't automatically mean atonality and unrecognisable pulse, modernity embraces many facets. One can always hope that she will have no choice in the matter as she matures and probes deeper, genius if it is there will out and become itself, not a clone stagnating within a style of writing that has been done.
> 
> I've said this before, but I also wonder if *a stint in a top conservatoire amongst peers would be beneficial for her.* The talent and ability of students in the best places would be quite a leveller for her, but will she even bother..?...does she need to?


You never know in these things. In the right hands yes. Training is good no matter how talented you are. Obviously Mozart had his own conservatoire in his father and Bach in his family. What it doesn't need is talentless academics (and haven't we all met them?) who squeeze the musical life out of the girl.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

DavidA said:


> You never know in these things. In the right hands yes. Training is good no matter how talented you are. Obviously Mozart had his own conservatoire in his father and Bach in his family. *What it doesn't need is talentless academics (and haven't we all met them?) who squeeze the musical life out of the girl.*


She would definitely be a unique case to handle by professors for sure. A lot of academics are also brilliant though (and especially in the standard of establishment she could walk in to) and would be able to expose her to what she and they feel she might need. 
I agree though David, it would be a delicate matter to draw her out and let her develop, flourish and find her own way, but she wouldn't be the first precocious talent to pass through academia and come out stronger still.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

mikeh375 said:


> She would definitely be a unique case to handle by professors for sure. A lot of academics are also brilliant though (and especially in the standard of establishment she could walk in to) and would be able to expose her to what she and they feel she might need.
> I agree though David, it would be a delicate matter to draw her out and let her develop, flourish and find her own way, but she wouldn't be the first precocious talent to pass through academia and come out stronger still.


I dont think she would be that unique a case. Unless you mean she is a raw talent more or less self taught.

there are scores of equally talented young composers - more accomplished in fact - and better trained. They just have not had the promotion Alma has had.

But back to the thread

it looks like 20thC is leading


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

stomanek said:


> I dont think she would be that unique a case. Unless you mean she is a raw talent more or less self taught.
> 
> there are scores of equally talented young composers - more accomplished in fact - and better trained. They just have not had the promotion Alma has had.
> 
> ...


Indeed Stomanek, see my post 24. Her being amongst equal talents would give her some perspective. I'd say most composers end up self taught irrespective of training, because no one else is going to find your music for you.
Yay, you're right, the 20thC is leading...


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> I dont think she would be that unique a case. Unless you mean she is a raw talent more or less self taught.
> 
> *there are scores of equally talented young composers - more accomplished in fact -* and better trained. They just have not had the promotion Alma has had.
> 
> ...


Funny? They must have passed me by! I can't think of anyone or do you mean some of those who write these awful tuneless commissions for the BBC?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Funny? They must have passed me by! I can't think of anyone or do you mean some of those who write these awful tuneless commissions for the BBC?


Im talking about under 16s in junior departments of music colleges. You wouldn't know about them. Many will go on to become respected composers.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> Im talking about under 16s in junior departments of music colleges. You wouldn't know about them. Many will go on to become respected composers.


You know them? I'd be interested if you have any concrete information if any are as talented as our young lady under discussion?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

The introduction to Ms. Deutscher's piano concerto is too long for its material. Mozart or Mendelssohn wouldn't have made that mistake.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

stomanek said:


> maybe -
> 
> without Mozart though I would be voting 19thC mainly on the merits of a dozen masterworks


Yes, the Mozarts are what makes the 18th Century concertos the winner for me but CPE Bach wrote so many delightful keyboard concertos to clear the path for him. This wonderful CD series runs to 20 volumes and it is hard to stop listening to them.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> You know them? I'd be interested if you have any concrete information if any are as talented as our young lady under discussion?


I used to have some connections with RCM Junior Dept so yes I do know some of them and have heard the winning compositions of the many competitions they encouraged the students to take part in. So yes I do have a credible point of reference. The music was forward looking - freer in form - mostly tonal - and generally very skilfully composed.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> The introduction to Ms. Deutscher's piano concerto is too long for its material. Mozart or Mendelssohn wouldn't have made that mistake.


Way too long. For long minutes I feared that the young lady had either had a seizure, forgotten the score, or was overwhelmed by stage fright.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Strange Magic said:


> Way too long. For long minutes I feared that the young lady had either had a seizure, forgotten the score, or was overwhelmed by stage fright.


and this is where having professional guidance can be useful


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> I used to have some connections with RCM Junior Dept so yes I do know some of them and have heard the winning compositions of the many competitions they encouraged the students to take part in. So yes I do have a credible point of reference. The music was forward looking - freer in form - mostly tonal - and generally very skilfully composed.


Pity we haven't heard any of it. Do you know why?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> and this is where having professional guidance can be useful


As I said everyone needs training - even the greatest geniuses. The thing is to get the right training.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Pity we haven't heard any of it. Do you know why?


Yes because Alma is composing conventional tuneful music for the crowds and her parents have done a first rate job of getting her into the public eye.

There are parents of very gifted children who avoid publicity believing it may not be in the interests of the child in the long term.

Sorry I did not really answer your question.

why dont you call the colleges and ask when they have their end of term concerts. Not all music is gifted to you on a plate via youtube.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

DavidA said:


> Reading what Alma has said I can agree with her statements: "Lots of people have been telling me that if I want to grow up, I have to compose music that will reflect the ugliness of the modern world. I don't want to do this. I want to compose music that I find beautiful." and "If the world is so ugly, then what's the point of making it even uglier with ugly music?"
> Hearing some of the utterly unlistenable discordant stuff that comes over the radio that immediately has one reaching for the off switch one can only agree!


As has been pointed out the last time this was posted, she is presenting a strawman and begging the question by equivocating modern music with ugly music. She fails to realize that just because something is modern does not mean it has to be ugly. There is plenty of beautiful modern music out there and it is not that hard to find.

And I highly doubt anyone has ever told her to write ugly music or reflect an ugly world with music. I keep trying to imagine how that conversation might go and it keeps sounding completely ridiculous. What people probably do is to encourage her to express herself with a more modern vocabulary, but she naively equates modern vocabulary with "ugly", so she thinks they are telling her to write ugly music. What she also fails to realize is that there have been musical breakthroughs in expression and technique over the last 230 years (since the era she imitates), including ways of making music "beautiful". I think that her own personal vision and experience would resonate more with modern listeners if she adopted a more modern vocabulary. That's all I think people are suggesting.



> "If the world is so ugly, then what's the point of making it even uglier with ugly music?"


Some people do, in fact, experience an ugly world in modern times and it should be no surprise to anyone that as artists, they wish to write about their human experiences. It can be highly cathartic for both the writer and the audience to experience such art. If you don't like it, don't listen to it. There is plenty of beautiful modern music to listen to as well.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Torkelburger said:


> As has been pointed out the last time this was posted, she is presenting a strawman and begging the question by equivocating modern music with ugly music. She fails to realize that just because something is modern does not mean it has to be ugly. There is plenty of beautiful modern music out there and it is not that hard to find.
> 
> And I highly doubt anyone has ever told her to write ugly music or reflect an ugly world with music. I keep trying to imagine how that conversation might go and it keeps sounding completely ridiculous. What people probably do is to encourage her to express herself with a more modern vocabulary, but she naively equates modern vocabulary with "ugly", so she thinks they are telling her to write ugly music. What she also fails to realize is that there have been musical breakthroughs in expression and technique over the last 230 years (since the era she imitates), including ways of making music "beautiful". I think that her own personal vision and experience would resonate more with modern listeners if she adopted a more modern vocabulary. That's all I think people are suggesting.
> 
> Some people do, in fact, experience an ugly world in modern times and it should be no surprise to anyone that as artists, they wish to write about their human experiences. It can be highly cathartic for both the writer and the audience to experience such art. If you don't like it, don't listen to it. There is plenty of beautiful modern music to listen to as well.


evoking ugliness in music can make for beautiful art can it not

think about the ugly nature of don giovanni at his most treacherous and vile for examPle - now that's ugliness worth listening to


----------



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

What Alma is composing is juvenilia - she's no Erich Korngold in the child composer stakes but what she is composing serves its own purposes in terms of gaining experience. It doesn't necessarily mean that she will carry on composing in a similar vein for ever, so, assuming we are actually interested, let's see where she is ten years from now (IF she's still around).


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

stomanek said:


> evoking ugliness in music can make for beautiful art can it not
> 
> think about the ugly nature of don giovanni at his most treacherous and vile for examPle - now that's ugliness worth listening to


Ah, but does Mozart do that? Where in the music of _Don Giovanni_ is the ugliness of an amoral rapist expressed? Where, in fact, is the ugliness in any music by Mozart? Or by any composer of his time? Even the chaos before the creation is imagined by Haydn as a rather gentle and lovely (at least to modern ears) sequence of chromatic harmonies which feel at most improvisatory, but not at all chaotic.

My impression is that the expression of ugliness in art was as alien to the sensibilities of the Classical era as it is to Alma Deutscher. Haydn and Mozart might have said exactly what she did: "If the world is so ugly, then what's the point of making it even uglier with ugly music?" If this is right, it makes Ms. Deutscher a throwback to an age even beyond Romanticism.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DavidA said:


> Hearing some of the utterly unlistenable discordant stuff that comes over the radio that immediately has one reaching for the off switch one can only agree!


Radio where you live must be a lot more adventurous than radio where I live.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> My impression is that the expression of ugliness in art was as alien to the sensibilities of the Classical era


I'm suddenly reminded of Beethoven's remark on Spohr: "He is too rich in dissonances; pleasure in his music is marred by his chromatic melody."


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

janxharris said:


> Indeed - but she seems to be taken quite seriously by composer and musicologist Ron Weidberg - who said (from wikipedia):
> 
> _"Alma's most important talent is the perfect connection between her inner world and the melodies she creates, which are so beautiful because they stem directly from this inner world. Few composers can write such tunes, which from the first moment are immediately impressed upon our memory, and thus turn into the possession of all those who listen to them. Alma is one of these composers, and this is why we are confident that the melodies she is writing now will remain with us even when we ourselves no longer remain the same as we were."_


She developed quickly for someone her age, but her melodies are pretty forgettable. Orchestration was really lacking I thought. Heck even her playing is not as great as these prodigy young pianists. It's unfair to judge for a work done at that age, but the praise is unwarranted. He should just say it's astounding considering her age, but Mozart wrote much better stuff at a younger age.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> She developed quickly for someone her age, but her melodies are pretty forgettable. Orchestration was really lacking I thought. Heck even her playing is not as great as these prodigy young pianists. It's unfair to judge for a work done at that age, but the praise is unwarranted. He should just say it's astounding considering her age, but Mozart wrote much better stuff at a younger age.


Sometimes I ponder if I'm not bringing anything great to the table in my own music, why do it at all? Some ppl just care less about these things! Or perhaps I care too much.


----------



## Aloevera (Oct 1, 2017)

Woodduck said:


> Ah, but does Mozart do that? Where in the music of _Don Giovanni_ is the ugliness of an amoral rapist expressed? Where, in fact, is the ugliness in any music by Mozart? Or by any composer of his time? Even the chaos before the creation is imagined by Haydn as a rather gentle and lovely (at least to modern ears) sequence of chromatic harmonies which feel at most improvisatory, but not at all chaotic.
> 
> My impression is that the expression of ugliness in art was as alien to the sensibilities of the Classical era as it is to Alma Deutscher. Haydn and Mozart might have said exactly what she did: "If the world is so ugly, then what's the point of making it even uglier with ugly music?" If this is right, it makes Ms. Deutscher a throwback to an age even beyond Romanticism.


While I agree with what you're saying, about the essentiality of "ugly music" I would disagree with your interpretation of Mozart. While indeed it maybe to pretty at times, I think he definitely dips into the chaotic side but manages to bring ammends to. I think he may certainly disagree that music must always be 'pretty', but it must always subdue chaotic force . I agree, that one limited feature is that he doesn't confront it enough, and it feels like at times not getting to the bottom of things, There is the famous quote "Music, even in situations of the greatest horror, should never be painful to the ear but should flatter and charm it, and thereby always remain music." He doesn't seem to be saying that music should not be horrific, but that in that moment not completely succumb to it. I think there are a lot of interpretations which could get really heavy and violent, even in more lighter pieeces but it always manages to soothe it and provide relief to it. I think Mozart is always associated with a lot of elegance so most interpretations deliberately ignore the violent element. Certainly I think he stays on the pretty side too much, but I think the one element that he excels it out is managing briefly to touch up on on the the chaos and ammending it and bringing music to it. Unless you can think of a composer who does it better. To me, I don't mind the chaotic element in Beethoven or Wagner , but it doesnt seem to truly resolve, it feels like its constantly being stirred up and that one is driven to drunken madness


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Sometimes I ponder if I'm not bringing anything great to the table in my own music, why do it at all? Some ppl just care less about these things! Or perhaps I care too much.


Personally I feel in her case, she is doing it (or pressured to do it?) to fill someone else's shoes. Maybe just that she lacks the maturity to hear differently. But I think it's more worthwhile for her to write something after listening more and feeling where the music takes her. I think anyone is only limited by their listening ability. Music doesn't have to be about pushing boundaries. I think if you enjoy what you're doing that's enough reason to do it, but if you could fine tune and push it to where you would like to see the music go in a more intuitive way then that's better. Like what others were hinting at, I feel she was justifying herself at making music just not to sound ugly. It's great at her age, but except for a bit of early fame unless she digs deeper later on, she will fizzle out I would think


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Sometimes I ponder if I'm not bringing anything great to the table in my own music, why do it at all? Some ppl just care less about these things! Or perhaps I care too much.


_Some ppl just care less about these things!_

Can you explain what you mean CN36?


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

janxharris said:


> _Some ppl just care less about these things!_
> 
> Can you explain what you mean CN36?


Some composers care less about striving for greatness. They lack a certain amount of insecurity to keep themselves on their toes!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Torkelburger said:


> As has been pointed out the last time this was posted, she is presenting a strawman and begging the question by equivocating modern music with ugly music. She fails to realize that just because something is modern does not mean it has to be ugly. *There is plenty of beautiful modern music out there and it is not that hard to find.*
> 
> And I highly doubt anyone has ever told her to write ugly music or reflect an ugly world with music. I keep trying to imagine how that conversation might go and it keeps sounding completely ridiculous. What people probably do is to encourage her to express herself with a more modern vocabulary, but she naively equates modern vocabulary with "ugly", so she thinks they are telling her to write ugly music. What she also fails to realize is that there have been musical breakthroughs in expression and technique over the last 230 years (since the era she imitates), including ways of making music "beautiful". I think that her own personal vision and experience would resonate more with modern listeners if she adopted a more modern vocabulary. That's all I think people are suggesting.
> 
> ...


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Phil loves classical said:


> She developed quickly for someone her age, but her melodies are pretty forgettable. Orchestration was really lacking I thought. Heck even her playing is not as great as these prodigy young pianists. It's unfair to judge for a work done at that age, but the praise is unwarranted. He should just say it's astounding considering her age, but Mozart wrote much better stuff at a younger age.


Mozart was also - even as a child - drawing insPiration from contemPorary comPosers. His music did not look back to Previous eras and at some stage it started to become innovative.

But I do give Alma's Parents credit for MAKING MONEY out of having a musical child. The normal order is for lessons etc to virtually bankruPt Parents so well done to them for that.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Some composers care less about striving for greatness. They lack a certain amount of insecurity to keep themselves on their toes!


You think that some composers know that what they have created isn't great? Aren't you merely imposing your version of what constitutes 'great' as a standard by which to measure their work?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Woodduck said:


> Ah, but does Mozart do that? Where in the music of _Don Giovanni_ is the ugliness of an amoral rapist expressed? Where, in fact, is the ugliness in any music by Mozart? Or by any composer of his time? Even the chaos before the creation is imagined by Haydn as a rather gentle and lovely (at least to modern ears) sequence of chromatic harmonies which feel at most improvisatory, but not at all chaotic.
> 
> My impression is that the expression of ugliness in art was as alien to the sensibilities of the Classical era as it is to Alma Deutscher. Haydn and Mozart might have said exactly what she did: "If the world is so ugly, then what's the point of making it even uglier with ugly music?" If this is right, it makes Ms. Deutscher a throwback to an age even beyond Romanticism.


Well maybe the counts snarling aria in act 3 of figaro is a better examPle - or monastos in zauberflote. Osmin in saraglio. queens of the night? Mozart is like often like Austen in the way that he uses satire to exPress ugliness - such as in the wager scene in cosi.

give me some examPles then from wagner


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

DavidA said:


> Torkelburger;1685344]As has been pointed out the last time this was posted, she is presenting a strawman and begging the question by equivocating modern music with ugly music. She fails to realize that just because something is modern does not mean it has to be ugly. *There is plenty of beautiful modern music out there and it is not that hard to find.*
> 
> And I highly doubt anyone has ever told her to write ugly music or reflect an ugly world with music. I keep trying to imagine how that conversation might go and it keeps sounding completely ridiculous. What people probably do is to encourage her to express herself with a more modern vocabulary, but she naively equates modern vocabulary with "ugly", so she thinks they are telling her to write ugly music. What she also fails to realize is that there have been musical breakthroughs in expression and technique over the last 230 years (since the era she imitates), including ways of making music "beautiful". I think that her own personal vision and experience would resonate more with modern listeners if she adopted a more modern vocabulary. That's all I think people are suggesting.
> 
> ...


How far does your taste in modern go? Have you tried Olivier Messiaen's Quartet for the End of Time?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

stomanek said:


> Mozart was also - even as a child - drawing insPiration from contemPorary comPosers. His music did not look back to Previous eras and at some stage it started to become innovative.


OTOH another great prodigy, Mendelssohn, clearly looked back in his youthful years at a long-dead master -- JS Bach.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

janxharris said:


> How far does your taste in modern go? Have you tried Olivier Messiaen's Quartet for the End of Time?


hmm - not the best examPle if you want to convince a traditionalist that mid 20thC music can be beautiful


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

20th century for sure


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

janxharris said:


> How far does your taste in modern go? Have you tried Olivier Messiaen's Quartet for the End of Time?


Three problems:

1. I don't like it
2. It is not beautiful
3. it was written 80 years ago so can hardly be called contemporary. We were talking young composers writing today


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> hmm - not the best examPle if you want to convince a traditionalist that mid 20thC music can be beautiful


Please note I am not a 'traditionalist'


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

stomanek said:


> hmm - not the best examPle if you want to convince a traditionalist that mid 20thC music can be beautiful


'Beautiful or memorable or that keeps me from the off button of my radio' were the words used.

Part V - "Praise to the eternity of Jesus" is beautiful IMO.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

janxharris said:


> 'Beautiful or memorable or that keeps me from the off button of my radio' were the words used.
> 
> Part V - "Praise to the eternity of Jesus" is beautiful IMO.


I heard the first 10 min expecting something wonderful from the title - and went straight for the off button on my radio when I realised it wasn't gonna improve.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Please note I am not a 'traditionalist'


you listen to any post 1950 music?


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

stomanek said:


> I heard the first 10 min expecting something wonderful from the title - and went straight for the off button on my radio when I realised it wasn't gonna improve.


Okay........................................


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> you listen to any post 1950 music?


Of course. Lots


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Of course. Lots


ok - so in what way are you not a traditionalist?
you reject atonal music do you not?


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

janxharris said:


> .......
> 
> Part V - "Praise to the eternity of Jesus" is beautiful IMO.


Oh yes, one of the most moving examples of his music imo, as is the companion piece in the same work.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Here's a relatively modern piece to show how moving harmony beyond classicism can be.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> ok - so in what way are you not a traditionalist?
> you reject atonal music do you not?


How does that define me as a traditionalist. I rejected the atonal avant gard at a time when it was traditional to applaud it.


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

I voted 19th century, just to participate. The truth is that the quality knows no time and era.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> How does that define me as a traditionalist. I rejected the atonal avant gard at a time when it was traditional to applaud it.


ok whatever - we need to establish definitions

though I was correct about the quartet for end of time unlikely to be a good recommendation for you


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Dimace said:


> I voted 19th century, just to participate. *The truth is that the quality knows no time and era.*


what has that got to do with the poll question?


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

mikeh375 said:


> Here's a relatively modern piece to show how moving harmony beyond classicism can be.


I hear the opening to Lohengrin and a lot of Barber's Adagio, mixed with a few more dissonant passages like around 5:05. It's these passages which I dislike unfortunately.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> How does that define me as a traditionalist. I rejected the atonal avant gard at a time when it was traditional to applaud it.


thinking on I would probably say you are a traditionalist in classical music if the bulk of your listening and preferences pre-date the year 1900. As an approximate definition - this is up for discussion and if you have a better one I would love to hear it.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> thinking on I would probably say you are a traditionalist in classical music if the bulk of your listening and preferences pre-date the year 1900. As an approximate definition - this is up for discussion and if you have a better one I would love to hear it.


Wrong. But in any case how does that make me a traditionalist. Your problem is that you use words with our thinking about them. I was never a traditionalist


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

mikeh375 said:


> Here's a relatively modern piece to show how moving harmony beyond classicism can be.


I see what you mean, however - its not really interesting enough to make me return to it.

now I need to listen to that Messiaen


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Wrong. But in any case how does that make me a traditionalist. Your problem is that you use words with our thinking about them


what am I wrong about?

all you are doing is contradicting me

a definition from an online dictionary:

traditionalist

an advocate of maintaining tradition, especially so as to resist change.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

you said yourself you rejected atonal avant garde

ie. you resisted change.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> what am I wrong about?
> 
> all you are doing is contradicting me
> 
> ...


 I resist things I don't like. Anything wrong with that?

You apparently don't?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

janxharris said:


> 'Beautiful or memorable or that keeps me from the off button of my radio' were the words used.
> 
> Part V - "Praise to the eternity of Jesus" is beautiful IMO.


OK this is better. Maybe I should go back and re-appraise the whole work.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Nope. I resist tuneless rackets. Anything wrong with that?


 *I rejected the atonal avant gard at a time when it was traditional to applaud it.*

Yes you did reject an entire new musical movement. There are your words above.

There is something in your language that smacks of a traditionalist.

ie - squeeky door music type comments.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> *I rejected the atonal avant gard at a time when it was traditional to applaud it.*
> 
> Yes you did reject an entire new musical movement. There are your words above.
> 
> ...


I thought I'd made it clear I did the same. But in any case I don't see the point of these sort of pointless arguments over semantics when the thread is piano concertos.


----------



## Clouds Weep Snowflakes (Feb 24, 2019)

My favorites come of the 19th century, followed by he former and the latter (I'll admit I'm less familiar with our century's works, any suggestion?).


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

My favorite piano concertos are Mozart's so 18th for me


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> My favorites come of the 19th century, followed by he former and the latter (I'll admit I'm less familiar with our century's works, any suggestion?).


Try Ned Rorem's concertos and Britten's only piano concerto for tonally based works....20thC though, not 21st. Hanson wrote a nice one too.


----------



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

In addition to those offered by mikeh375 I suggest those by John Ireland (1930) and Paul Hindemith (1945). Hindemith also composed a work for ballet called _The Four Temperaments_ (1940), which is a concerto for piano and strings in all but name.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

> Must confess I don't haven't found much modern (ie being written now) music that I consider beautiful or memorable or that keeps me from the off button of my radio,


Given that your standard of greatness for modern music is the highly derivative musical musings of an 11-year-old adolescent who writes in a style from 250 years ago, I totally believe that. Still plenty of beautiful modern music, however.



> Nor do I find listening to the tuneless racket dreamed up by some modern composers cathartic for me at any rate.


You only need to be aware of the answer to your question. You don't have to find the music cathartic. Just know _others_ do. Again, this should answer Alma's (and your's) question why sometimes ugly music is written in an already ugly world. Some composers and audiences find that even ugly music can be deeply moving and cathartic, and about dealing with real-life situations, experiences, and struggles (Corigliano Sym. 1 for example).


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Torkelburger said:


> Given that your standard of greatness for modern music is the highly derivative musical musings of an 11-year-old adolescent who writes in a style from 250 years ago, I totally believe that. Still plenty of beautiful modern music, however.
> 
> You only need to be aware of the answer to your question. You don't have to find the music cathartic. Just know _others_ do. Again, this should answer Alma's (and your's) question why sometimes ugly music is written in an already ugly world. Some composers and audiences find that even ugly music can be deeply moving and cathartic, and about dealing with real-life situations, experiences, and struggles (Corigliano Sym. 1 for example).


Seeing that you obviously cannot read what I actually wrote, your opinion doesn't count very much to me. Where on earth did I say that my standard for greatness was the music of an 11 year-old? As I don't count the 11 year-old Mozart's music as great I would hardly do so for Alma. I see you are one of these people who thinks they can see into other people's minds when they can't even read what they wrote! :lol:

I don't need to be aware of anything. I only need to be aware of what I enjoy listening to. If I like listening to Strauss' Elektra (which I am listening to now) I will do so without any input from people who think they know what other people should enjoy better than those people do themselves. I have dealt with plenty of real-life situations all round the world in many different countries thank-you! Please do not give me any lectures on that! I will decide on what I listen to!


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

I don't know any 21st century piano concertos well, so my answer of "all centuries" isn't strictly accurate.

The vast majority of piano concertos I love are in the 20th century, but I couldn't be without Mozart, Beethoven and Brahms.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Seeing that you obviously cannot read what I actually wrote, your opinion doesn't count very much to me. Where on earth did I say that my standard for greatness was the music of an 11 year-old? As I don't count the 11 year-old Mozart's music as great I would hardly do so for Alma. I see you are one of these people who thinks they can see into other people's minds when they can't even read what they wrote! :lol:
> 
> I don't need to be aware of anything. I only need to be aware of what I enjoy listening to. If I like listening to Strauss' Elektra (which I am listening to now) I will do so without any input from people who think they know what other people should enjoy better than those people do themselves. I have dealt with plenty of real-life situations all round the world in many different countries thank-you! Please do not give me any lectures on that! I will decide on what I listen to!


why does it always sound like you are on a ranting tirade?

anyway fair point it was ArtMusic that said Alma writes great music - #34


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> why does it always sound like you are on a ranting tirade?
> 
> anyway fair point it was ArtMusic that said Alma writes great music - #34


Not ranting at all. Just replying to what I felt was a somewhat impertinent tirade. Looking at some of your posts I think you might have done the same! :lol:


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

janxharris said:


> You think that some composers know that what they have created isn't great? Aren't you merely imposing your version of what constitutes 'great' as a standard by which to measure their work?


It's the same old argument, "it's all subjective".


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Not ranting at all. Just replying to what I felt was a somewhat impertinent tirade. Looking at some of your posts I think you might have done the same! :lol:


OK DavidA - you win - lets get back on topic.

we need some more Mozart fans to get the 18thC PC on top.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

> Seeing that you obviously cannot read what I actually wrote, your opinion doesn't count very much to me. Where on earth did I say that my standard for greatness was the music of an 11 year-old? As I don't count the 11 year-old Mozart's music as great I would hardly do so for Alma. I see you are one of these people who thinks they can see into other people's minds when they can't even read what they wrote!


Fine then, you're wrong, there is plenty of modern music to be considered beautiful despite you're opinion to the contrary. You need not agree, however. But it is there for any who wish to enjoy it.


> I don't need to be aware of anything. I only need to be aware of what I enjoy listening to.


Okay then, so I guess we should all expect to see you display your ignorance again and quote Alma's question a third or fourth time in the future? Fine by me, I can copy and paste the reply just as many times as you can copy and paste the question. It's really not that difficult of a question to answer really, despite the fact you keep sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "La La La La" and just keep ignoring the answer.


> If I like listening to Strauss' Elektra (which I am listening to now) I will do so without any input from people who think they know what other people should enjoy better than those people do themselves.


And yet, you have no trouble offering your own "input" for all of us to read. Strange, that.


> I have dealt with plenty of real-life situations all round the world in many different countries thank-you! Please do not give me any lectures on that! I will decide on what I listen to!


Me too! Give me some of that ol' modern beautiful music! Woo-hoo!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Torkelburger said:


> Fine then, you're wrong, there is plenty of modern music to be considered beautiful despite you're opinion to the contrary. You need not agree, however. But it is there for any who wish to enjoy it.
> 
> Okay then, so I guess we should all expect to see you display your ignorance again and quote Alma's question a third or fourth time in the future? Fine by me, I can copy and paste the reply just as many times as you can copy and paste the question. It's really not that difficult of a question to answer really, despite the fact you keep sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "La La La La" and just keep ignoring the answer.
> 
> ...


Sorry mate, you are perfectly wrong because beauty is in the ear of the beholder and if I don't consider it worth listening to I just don't listen to it. I am the consumer and what I say goes round my radio or CD deck when I am listening.

You of course are now displaying your own complete ignorance again of what I actually said. Interesting that another member has already pointed that out. The problem with people like you is that you are so busy telling other people what they think you don't take the trouiblento read what they actually write! Never mind! :lol:

Of course I have no trouble offering my input - that is what this forum is for - what I don't do is tell other people what they like or should like. I suggest you leave off doing it yourself ! As this thread is about piano concerti you are taking it way off topic!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> OK DavidA - you win - lets get back on topic.
> 
> we need some more Mozart fans to get the 18thC PC on top.


Well I like piano concertos across the board but Mozart wrote the most sublime set of masterpieces for the instrument.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

Heed your own advice, buddy.


> My heart always sinks when I hear the words 'New commission' as you know it's likely to be a tuneless racket!


Sorry mate, you are perfectly wrong because beauty is in the ear of the beholder. Sounds like your calling new commissions tuneless rackets and that we shouldn't like them ("you know" it's a tuneless racket). How do you know what we should think? Did you mean not to offer that "input"?


> Hearing some of the utterly unlistenable discordant stuff that comes over the radio that immediately has one reaching for the off switch one can only agree!


Sorry mate, you are perfectly wrong because beauty is in the ear of the beholder and if I (do) or don't consider it worth listening to I either just (do) or don't listen to it. I am the consumer and what I say goes round my radio or CD deck when I am listening.

There you go again. (Has "one" reaching for the off switch and "one" can only agree). How do you know what "one" _should_ do?


> Must confess I don't haven't found much modern (ie being written now) music that I consider beautiful or memorable or that keeps me from the off button of my radio,. Nor do I find listening to the tuneless racket dreamed up by some modern composers cathartic for me at any rate.


Sorry mate, you are perfectly wrong because beauty is in the ear of the beholder and if I (do) or don't consider it worth listening to I either just (do) or don't listen to it. I am the consumer and what I say goes round my radio or CD deck when I am listening.

For someone who lectures on beauty in the ear of the beholder you sure do babble and complain about music you don't like (modern) a lot. If beauty is in the ear of the beholder then no one should say anything about any music being beautiful or not. This includes you.



> Of course I have no trouble offering my input - that is what this forum is for - what I don't do is tell other people what they like or should like.


I've only said there is beautiful modern music out there available to listen to. Never said anyone should like it. You're the one who posts rude, offensive, passive aggressive statements like calling modern music "utterly unlistenable discordant stuff" that has one "reaching for the off switch". Are you deliberately trying to goad people? Are you suggesting we shouldn't be listening to this type of music? Sounds like it to me. How do you expect people to respond to this crudeness?


> I suggest you leave off doing it yourself ! As this thread is about piano concerti you are taking it way off topic!


Then don't answer my posts. But any vigorous attacks on modern music will be defended with the same amount of vigor.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Torkelburger said:


> Some composers and audiences find that even ugly music can be deeply moving and cathartic, and about dealing with real-life situations, experiences, and struggles (Corigliano Sym. 1 for example).


An interesting admission that some of the music in question is ugly. Not what a lot of people would call a resounding endorsement.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

stomanek said:


> OK DavidA - you win - lets get back on topic.
> 
> we need some more Mozart fans to get the 18thC PC on top.


Don't forget Bach wrote some harpsichord concertos in the 18th century. Ultimately though, my vote went to Mozart.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Torkelburger said:


> Heed your own advice, buddy.
> 
> Sorry mate, you are perfectly wrong because beauty is in the ear of the beholder. Sounds like your calling new commissions tuneless rackets and that we shouldn't like them ("you know" it's a tuneless racket). How do you know what we should think? Did you mean not to offer that "input"?
> 
> ...


I just post the facts as they appear to me. Before you start defending your modern music I suggest you start reading people's posts properly.You were the one who said I viewed Alma's work as a masterpiece when I didn't say anything of the sort. Seems you are a little mixed up. You are also posting an attack on me in a thread on piano concertos, also having the impertinence to try and tell me what I should like and what I shouldn't like. I suggest (as I have done before) you do it on an appropriate thread rather than hijacking this one for your own purposes!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

The piano is of course a machine but it is amazing just how composers are brought out the most incredibly tuneful music from it. Some of my favourites:
Any of Mozart's mature concertos
Any if Beethoven's
The Schumann
Grieg
Both Brahms 
Mendelssohn
Tchaikovsky 1
Rachmaninov including the rhapsody
Prokofiev 3 but I have the set and enjoy them all
Bartok 1-3 
I've no doubt missed some out but you can fill-in. I enjoy all of these


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Well I like piano concertos across the board but Mozart wrote the most sublime set of masterpieces for the instrument.


I think over the years I have seen you commenting a lot of Mozart and Beethoven and other canonical composers - or at least these posts have stood out in my memory. Which is probably why I had you down as a traditionalist. You say you listen to a lot of post 1950 music. What about post 1980 music? (ie britten shost walton and others that traditionalists might listen to are all dead by this time)


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

stomanek said:


> I think over the years I have seen you commenting a lot of Mozart and Beethoven and other canonical composers - or at least these posts have stood out in my memory. Which is probably why I had you down as a traditionalist. You say you listen to a lot of post 1950 music. What about post 1980 music? (ie britten shost walton and others that traditionalists might listen to are all dead by this time)


I listened to Britten's piano concerto the other day and must confess it didn't do a lot for me - but I know a lot of people seem to think the same. But then there are only a few works of Britten I can really enthuse about. I missed out the two Shostakovich piano concertos which I enjoy especially the one with the trumpet.






I don't think Walton wrote a piano concerto. Interesting that he had to endure the sneers of the avant gard but their music has generally sunk into oblivion while his is still being played. I remember going to a concert when he was present many years ago.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Britten's piano concerto was an early work. It is a little thin but it does grow on you. I don't think it comes close to equaling his other early concerto - the one for violin - let alone other early works like Les Illuminations. The Shostakovich piano concertos are works of less ambition but perhaps all the more successful for that. Walton wrote a "Sinfonia Concertante for Orchestra with Piano". Tippett's piano concerto is greater than any of these (IMO, obviously).

I am not sure what sneers you refer to or which works have sunk into oblivion. The avant garde at the time (1930s-40s) was presumably Bartok (3 very great piano concertos), Stravinsky (a very good piano concerto - with other notable piano concertante coming later), Schoenberg (a great concerto for piano) ....


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> Britten's piano concerto was an early work. It is a little thin but it does grow on you. I don't think it comes close to equaling his other early concerto - the one for violin - let alone other early works like Les Illuminations. The Shostakovich piano concertos are works of less ambition but perhaps all the more successful for that. Walton wrote a "Sinfonia Concertante for Orchestra with Piano". Tippett's piano concerto is greater than any of these (IMO, obviously).
> 
> *I am not sure what sneers *you refer to or which works have sunk into oblivion. The avant garde at the time (1930s-40s) was presumably Bartok (3 very great piano concertos), Stravinsky (a very good piano concerto - with other notable piano concertante coming later), Schoenberg (a great concerto for piano) ....


The sneers of the avant gard towards people like Walton.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

DavidA said:


> I listened to Britten's piano concerto the other day and must confess it didn't do a lot for me - but I know a lot of people seem to think the same. But then there are only a few works of Britten I can really enthuse about. I missed out the two Shostakovich piano concertos which I enjoy especially the one with the trumpet.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The only piece by Britten I like is his VC

so no post 1980s works?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

DavidA said:


> The sneers of the avant gard towards people like Walton.


I don't think you have answered my questions. I understood that the sneers were coming towards Walton but didn't really get which of the sneerers had sunk into oblivion. There were many great piano concertos composed between 1910 and 1960 and none of them were by Britten, Walton or Shostakovich, all of whom wrote far greater music than their efforts for piano and orchestra.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> I don't think you have answered my questions. I understood that the sneers were coming towards Walton but didn't really get which of the sneerers had sunk into oblivion. *There were many great piano concertos composed between 1910 and 1960* and none of them were by Britten, Walton or Shostakovich, all of whom wrote far greater music than their efforts for piano and orchestra.


OK Rachmaninov, Prokofiev and Bartok. Don't know whether we'd put Gershwin's concerto up there with the greats. Certainly very enjoyable. Who else?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I included Schoenberg's and Stravinsky's in my original list (for the 30s and 40s). Prokofiev and Rachmaninov (and even Gershwin) can join them along with Ravel. But, going as far as the 50s, you do also have Tippett's concerto. And you might remember Poulenc. Carter's concerto came a little later. And then came Ligeti and Lutoslawski. Which avant garders who sneered at Walton did you have in mind?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> I included Schoenberg's and Stravinsky's in my original list (for the 30s and 40s). Prokofiev and Rachmaninov (and even Gershwin) can join them along with Ravel. But, going as far as the 50s, you do also have Tippett's concerto. And you might remember Poulenc. Carter's concerto came a little later. And then came Ligeti and Lutoslawski. Which avant garders who sneered at Walton did you have in mind?


I forgot Ravel - of course, two great concerti. Have them both in multiple recordings. I have Tippett's but find it most uninteresting and Poulenc is very lightweight. Not great concerti by any means. I have not heard Carter but Ligeti and Lutoslawski I find pretty unlistenable. Schoenberg and Stravinsky concerti have yet to find a real place in the repertoire for most concert goers. One listens in sufferance trying to find what people see in them. Probably more interesting to play than listen to.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Fair enough on Poulenc various concertos that involve one or more pianos - but they are surely as much fun as, and have at least an equal worth to, the Shostakovich concertos that you mentioned earlier. Especially the concerto for two pianos. 

All credit to you for trying quite a wide variety of concertos. If you have enjoyed any neoclassical (and later) Stravinsky then you might persevere with his concertante pieces - although they are not among his greatest pieces. As for the Schoenberg, even if you are not a fan of his serial works you might persevere with Uchida's recording. The notes may be different but the gestures seem to belong to the Romantic piano concerto tradition. I suspect, given your views on these other works, that you will not enjoy the Carter. Sorry, you don't like the Tippett - I think it a lovely work.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> Fair enough on Poulenc various concertos that involve one or more pianos - but they are surely as much fun as, and have at least an equal worth to, the Shostakovich concertos that you mentioned earlier. Especially the concerto for two pianos.
> 
> All credit to you for trying quite a wide variety of concertos. If you have enjoyed any neoclassical (and later) Stravinsky then you might persevere with his concertante pieces - although they are not among his greatest pieces. As for the Schoenberg, even if you are not a fan of his serial works you might persevere with Uchida's recording. The notes may be different but the gestures seem to belong to the Romantic piano concerto tradition. I suspect, given your views on these other works, that you will not enjoy the Carter. Sorry, you don't like the Tippett - I think it a lovely work.


The Poulencdpubleconcerto is quite boring I found. I'm not persevering with the Schoenberg as music is to be enjoyed and what's the point of listening to what I don't enjoy?


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

> I just post the facts as they appear to me.


Oh, yes of course. And as rudely and inflammatory as possible. And when others do this, they get your "beauty in the ear of the beholder" lecture.


> Before you start defending your modern music I suggest you start reading people's posts properly. You were the one who said I viewed Alma's work as a masterpiece when I didn't say anything of the sort. Seems you are a little mixed up.


Yes, I got it straight. You must be in the habit of having 11-year-old children make your arguments for you with their adolescent logic and wisdom and decade-old life's experiences. My bad.


> You are also posting an attack on me in a thread on piano concertos, also having the impertinence to try and tell me what I should like and what I shouldn't like.


No, you should read people's posts properly. Seems you are a little mixed up. I have said no such thing. I never said you should like or shouldn't like something. You must be one of these people who thinks they can see into other people's minds when they can't even read what they wrote!


> I suggest (as I have done before) you do it on an appropriate thread rather than hijacking this one for your own purposes!


Um, *news flash*, this whole discussion stems from _your_ post #53 and the statements _you_ made and quoted therein.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

DaveM said:


> An interesting admission that some of the music in question is ugly. Not what a lot of people would call a resounding endorsement.


I'm not sure what you mean. I'm not trying to endorse anything. Just answering Alma's question. There is much music that Alma would deem "ugly" but is intended to be experienced as a catharsis for those involved (as they were inspired by real-life negative events). Corigliano's _Symphony No. 1_, Husa's _Music For Prague_, Del Tredici's _Bullycide_, Rouse's _Flute Concerto_, etc.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

DavidA said:


> OK Rachmaninov, Prokofiev and Bartok. Don't know whether we'd put Gershwin's concerto up there with the greats. Certainly very enjoyable. Who else?


Barber's is wonderful!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Some as-yet-unmentioned and distinguished 20th-century concertos are Busoni's - the only piano concerto with a chorus in the finale - and Stenhammar's 2nd.


----------

