# Webern: Concerto for Nine Instruments op. 24



## soni (Jul 3, 2018)

Webern's Concerto for Nine Instruments is currently on the 101st tier of the Talk Classical community's favorite and most highly recommended works.

Wikipedia has an article on it

*What do you think about the piece? Do you love it? Hate it?*

I find this to be an extremely fascinating piece, and one of the highlights of serialism. It's already an impressive acheivement to be able to write a six minute concerto in 3 movements! For me, the highlight of the piece is the third movement, which manages to build up to an impressive and dramatic climax in less than one minute - the closing piano chords are exquisite, as is the way the piece abruptly ends. My suggestion for people who don't yet understand the piece is to listen out for three-note and two-note patterns, which show up throughout the piece on each of the instruments.

Listen to it here


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I remember when my son was young playing this on the record player. He said, "That's funny music, daddy!"


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

The second movement is quite beautiful. The melodic content created with just a couple of notes is quite remarkable. In another video below on that page Glenn Gould demonstrates the basic structure before performing the piece.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Tremendous music, inspired and expressive. Webern took many years to finish it, and he was very proud of the results, claiming that he the music was totally free and intuitive. It was rapidly appreciated for being a masterpiece by Adorno, Stockhausen, Leibowitz and others.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

I have yet to hear something from Webern that I don't like.

There is so much to enjoy with this piece. 

A long time favorite.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

The first time I heard it was in Glenn Gould's documentary. It was definitely not the performance to start out with this piece. It was rushed and smoothed over, and the music sounded all jumbled. Also the visuals are distracting.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Webern's music is sublime, such exquisite crystals of ultimate Romantic expression. I adore it.

The Concerto, op. 24 is amazing: so simple in some regards, such as regarding the 12-tone structure, but so deep in others, such as how the Klangfarbenmelodie fragments emerge and coalesce into real phrases and purely musical feeling. Transcendent.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Knorf said:


> Webern's music is sublime, such exquisite crystals of *ultimate Romantic expression*. I adore it.
> 
> The Concerto, op. 24 is amazing: so simple in some regards, such as regarding the 12-tone structure, but so deep in others, such as how the Klangfarbenmelodie fragments emerge and coalesce into real phrases and purely musical feeling. Transcendent.


I have to admit I never heard it in that sense. Stone me.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

In _The Path to the New Music_ Webern said the following about the musical structure of op 24



> We want to say _in an entirely new way_ what has been said before. But now I can invent more freely, everything has a deeper unity. Only now is it possible to compose in free fantasy, without constraint -- except by the row. To say it quite paradoxically: only on the basis of these unprecedented fetters has complete freedom become possible.


If that's right, and I think it is, this is indeed the apotheosis of romanticism. _Frei aber froh_, as Brahms liked to put it.

(By the way, you see now how music really is just style, like hairdressing, not at all about idea. Of course it's absurd to claim that Webern is writing in the style of Brahms, but not absurd that he's inspired by ideas which inspired Brahms.)


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

This work is miraculous. I appreciate reading everyone's words on this page, and I have nothing to add. I am still in a phase of awe with Webern's late music and still trying to wrap my head around so much of it, but some of what I've just read brings a little clarity to the music. I must admit that my response to so much of Webern is on what one could call a very "Romantic" level. I don't really think about the sounds I am hearing and I certainly do not intellectualize much of it (then I REALLY wouldn't be able to wrap my head around it!)–I just dive in and immerse myself and enjoy the sounds. I'll definitely have to listen to this work soon, when I finish Michelangeli playing Schumann's Carnaval.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

starthrower said:


> The second movement is quite beautiful. The melodic content created with just a couple of notes is quite remarkable. In another video below on that page Glenn Gould demonstrates the basic structure before performing the piece.


Agreed, that second movement is devastating. To liken it to another of Webern's works, it somewhat reminds me of the final movement of the Variations for Piano op.27.

Do we know why Webern has called this work a concerto? Did he model it after any previous concerto?


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

So this is Sinopoli's recording? Rats, I passed that up last month in the used CD store. He gives it a sympathetic reading.

Anyway, this is an incredible use of just three notes: forward, backwards, upside down, transposed up in the first movement, then one melodic line in the second movement , then back to three-note units in the third movement. Its structure is amazingly clear.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

The Webern _Concerto_ remains the work to play to introduce folks to serial music. I suspect most will know immediately if they hate this stuff or want to explore it further (if not outright love it at first hearing). By now this sound world is familiar to everybody's ears, mostly due to its presence in film scores, but I fantasize about how it was experienced when it was new. Probably with much shock. Still, I suspect that though there were those then who hated it immediately, there were also those who wanted to explore it further (if they didn't outright love it at first hearing).

The _Concerto_ ranks as probably the second most played Webern work in my listening room (and I deeply enjoy reading along with the score while I listen); the honor of most played Webern work goes to the _Piano Variations_, Op. 27.






I remember when I first heard these _Variations_. I certainly did not hate it. Rather, I repeatedly played the record over and over for some time. I found I was quite interested in exploring this sort of music (and the music of this fellow Webern) further. In fact, I may have even loved it at first hearing.

Same for the _Concerto_.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I have never warmed to Webern's music but am interested in giving the Op. 24 Concerto a serious listening or three. I have Boulez and Craft. Which do the Webern experts here recommend?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

flamencosketches said:


> Do we know why Webern has called this work a concerto? Did he model it after any previous concerto?


Seems to me to be a nonet, comparable in some ways with Spohr's (though that has no piano part). Of course let's remember that Bach wrote a concerto for one instrument!


----------



## soni (Jul 3, 2018)

KenOC said:


> I have never warmed to Webern's music but am interested in giving the Op. 24 Concerto a serious listening or three. I have Boulez and Craft. Which do the Webern experts here recommend?


Go for the Boulez. Not a fan of Craft's version.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

soni said:


> Go for the Boulez. Not a fan of Craft's version.


Personally prefer the Boulez Sony version to DG version, although most prefer the DG. The DG is more relaxed, which is not how I like to hear the music.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

flamencosketches said:


> Do we know why Webern has called this work a concerto? Did he model it after any previous concerto?


Op 24 began life on Jan 16 1931, when Webern drew up a plan for a project he called _Orchesterstuke _(_Ouverture_). He played around with various ideas until he finally found one which excited him. By the first of July 1931 he had changed the title from _overture _to _concerto_, because he had decided to make the music a three movement cycle. He then experimented with different instrumentations, including a piano, and it started to be called _Piano Concerto_.

He didn't have time to work on it much again until summer 1934. In fact in 1934 he even thought about a choral version. On 7th July he called the piece _Divertimento _in discussions with Berg and Schoenberg. But by the premier he had settled again on _Concerto_.

(Glad to have Moldenhauer's book now!)


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Why does Webern's Concerto Op. 24 "work" for this listener?

First Movement: The opening is a series of thematic gestures which are played as phrases. If the notes come from a "row," then we don't know it, because the several notes of each phrase or melodic entity are played by one instrument after another, as if they were repeating the same meaning. Is it emotional? I don't see it that way, more like plant-growth patterns or crystal formations under a microscope. There is an "intelligence" and sentient quality, but I do not call it "emotion" as such. Gielen's version seems choppy and disconnected, and awkwardly slower, than Boulez' Sony version, which is faster and thus creates a more flowing, connected version in which separate instruments seem to form "aggregates" of phrasing which are more complex than Gielen's.

The middle "two note" section is slow, and that's its power. Otherwise the two-note "phrases" wouldn't work as swell. Still, we know they are "two note phrases" because two notes are played by each instrument as they appear. Simple, but accurate. Again, Boulez' version seems more coherent to me because of the piano. The piano in Boulez' version seems to be more continuous as an element, and holds everything together.

The third movement by Gielen sounds a little mechanical to me. Boulez' version works because the instruments are more emphatic, and seem to be "saying" something.

Still, I don't get any real sense of "emotion" from this music as others here seem to, or even a sense of "Romanticism" except as a sense of "suspended wonderment" as if witnessing some life-process taking place through a microscope. Scientists get off on stuff like that, don't they?

Ken OC's statement seems to be the most sincere reaction. If I had to gauge my understanding of this piece by the overly-romanticised reactions I've seen here, I'd think I was missing something. But, no, it is what it is.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Overly romanticized to whom? I'd say my reaction is just the right level of romanticized. :lol: Also, it appears that the only person in this thread to have used the word "emotional" is you.


----------



## MrMeatScience (Feb 15, 2015)

This is one of my absolute favorite works of Webern, and of serialism in general. So much expression packed into so little time, with a not a note going to waste. I've always enjoyed Boulez's reading, but I've not heard very many, admittedly. Has anyone here ever heard this live?


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

millionrainbows said:


> Ken OC's statement seems to be the most sincere reaction. If I had to gauge my understanding of this piece by the overly-romanticised reactions I've seen here, I'd think I was missing something. But, no, it is what it is.


It's very discouraging, in terms of the quality of this forum, that some like the above will disparage the sincerity of other posters' opinions, just because they are different. _De gustibus non est disputandum_.

I assure you, my love for Webern's music is very heartfelt and deeply considered.

For those who are sympathetic, another metaphor I like to use for Webern is it is the distilled essence of Romanticism.

Just as beer is a basically a precursor to making Scotch, Webern takes all of the most intense emotional moments in Romanticism and distills them to something sublime. (Remember, it's only a metaphor, but it works for me.) The heart of the run, as distillers call it.

To me, it's really obvious when I'm listening that Webern adored Mahler. It's well known that they all did, the Second Viennese School; they were among the first to recognize the greatness of Mahler's music. Somewhere out there, there's a photo of Webern conducting Mahler 6, in obvious ecstasy.

That composer who adored Mahler? Absolutely still there, in a fine distillation. That true Romantic spirit, still there.

The problem is a lot of people have mistaken notions about what Romanticism was and is. What is was not: nostalgia, sitting in comfort and half-listening to pretty sounds. _No._ The nostalgic, the reactionary, the conservative: they all wanted Classicism. The progressives (in terms of music) wanted the Romantics: music that pushed the individual bold & adventurous spirit of the artist, the artists who dared to venture forth into the unknown, and discover beauty where no one expected to find it and often at first didn't recognize it. To be free of the restraints of the past, to find new modes of expression: that was Romanticism.

And Webern was 100% part of it. To me, it's obvious. And I love it.


----------



## Guest (Jan 24, 2020)

DavidA said:


> I remember when my son was young playing this on the record player. He said, "That's funny music, daddy!"


Another magesterial, insightful post Mr DavidA; I applaud you.
Putting your son to one side, what's your opinion? Do you have the score for ready persusal among the numerous books on your shelf? If you do have the score, it shouldn't be too hard to find under "W" for Webern, just to the right of "W" for Wagner.


----------



## Guest (Jan 24, 2020)

"_That said, if you could give more attention to your spelling.... I'm sure I would understand better what you often struggle to express_".


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

flamencosketches said:


> Overly romanticized to whom? I'd say my reaction is just the right level of romanticized. :lol: Also, it appears that the only person in this thread to have used the word "emotional" is you.


Bingo! I may have used words such as romantic or emotional response if we were discussing Langsamer Satz. But the concerto has an entirely different effect on me. I was focused clearly on what Webern was creating musically with the threadbare ingredients. And it's beautiful in its own way. And maybe even scientists get off on this?


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

I think I hear what *starthrower* is trying to say about this piece. While I wouldn't use the words "emotion" or "romantic" it certainly doesn't violate Machaut's advice in my signature.


----------



## soni (Jul 3, 2018)

I've been pretty taken aback by how many people who listen to popular music genres and don't have any experience of classical music seem to warm to this piece immediately - I assumed they would dislike it, as is common with the majority of atonal works. From now on I'll always use this piece to introduce what music I listen to.


----------



## Guest (Jan 27, 2020)

Christabel said:


> "_That said, if you could give more attention to your spelling.... I'm sure I would understand better what you often struggle to express_".


Thank you Madame English teacher! Yes, I should have written "I'm sure I would better understand etc., etc.".
Still writing angry letters to the newspapers in Sydney?


----------



## Guest (Jan 27, 2020)

I leave the anger and vitriol to you. What a gift you have for it too. (It's good to have a gift though, isn't it!)


----------



## Guest (Jan 30, 2020)

Christabel said:


> "_That said, if you could give more attention to your spelling.... I'm sure I would understand better what you often struggle to express_".


And your opinion of the Webern piece in question is? Please, do tell.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

According to his Webern's student Peter Stadlen, the composer wanted the first movement of his _Piano Variations_, op. 27 to be played in a romanticized way with much rubato, comparing it to a Brahms Intermezzo. I learned became very comfortable playing it like that. In the _Concerto_, op. 24 rubato for the nine instruments would be very difficult and I doubt it would be effective. But the little phrases still evoke strong emotion, even pain, for me sometimes. If someone experiences romanticism in this piece I have no problem with it.


----------



## Guest (Feb 2, 2020)

Christabel said:


> I leave the anger and vitriol to you. What a gift you have for it too. (It's good to have a gift though, isn't it!)


You're the English teacher, so tell me if there shouldn't be a comma as I have bolded it here: "What a gift you have for *it,* too".
I'm quite happy with my gifts. You seem bitter and recriminatory. Problems at home?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Resurrecting a somewhat older thread, I was struck in listening to the Webern Concerto by its evocation of a painting by Joan Miró, _Carnival of Harlequin_. The Concerto is like a sound picture of the Miró, seen/heard by slowly moving a hearing/seeing slot across the painting. I like it, and was struck by the correspondence...


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Webern's favourite artist was Klimt, he saw a spirituality in Klimt's paintings which, he felt, was the same as he was trying to express in his music. He said that Klimt was inspired by correspondences between the natural world and the "metaphysical" world. I think this could be a really interesting area to explore.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Mandryka said:


> Webern's favourite artist was Klimt, he saw a spirituality in Klimt's paintings which, he felt, was the same as he was trying to express in his music. He said that Klimt was inspired by correspondences between the natural world and the "metaphysical" world. I think this could be a really interesting area to explore.


The real or imagined metaphysical elements in music and art, and the links connecting one artwork to another make for interesting speculation. We have a copy of a Klimt painting hanging above our fireplace of a grove of birches, and I think of Grieg or Sibelius or even Tchaikovsky when contemplating it--I find the correspondence between Webern and Miró the more obvious, and wonder to what extent Webern knew of Miró's art. I see/hear an affinity (some) between the music of Bartók and the art of Paul Klee. One can go on with this....


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

I can imagine Kandinsky and even Ernst with this music. A favourite of mine since I had to study it all those years ago.
As I listened, youtube kindly segued into his op21 Symphony, another beauty.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

mikeh375 said:


> I can imagine Kandinsky and even Ernst with this music. A favourite of mine since I had to study it all those years ago.
> As I listened, youtube kindly segued into his op21 Symphony, another beauty.


Kandinsky, yes; Ernst, not so much. But clearly, "Your experience may vary."


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Strange Magic said:


> Kandinsky, yes; Ernst, not so much. But clearly, "Your experience may vary."


Yeah, totally subjective. Ernst painted a set of imaginary landscapes called 'Forests' and I couldn't help but see them in my mind's eye now and again.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Roger Knox said:


> According to his Webern's student Peter Stadlen, the composer wanted the first movement of his _Piano Variations_, op. 27 to be played in a romanticized way with much rubato, comparing it to a Brahms Intermezzo. I learned became very comfortable playing it like that. In the _Concerto_, op. 24 rubato for the nine instruments would be very difficult and I doubt it would be effective. But the little phrases still evoke strong emotion, even pain, for me sometimes. If someone experiences romanticism in this piece I have no problem with it.


I agree; there's a recording by Peter Stadien made in 1948 in which the tempo is flexible, individual notes are emphasized as the "main voice," and tempo, dymamics, and phrasing are in the service not of the series, but of the formal structure.


----------

