# Webern or Schoenberg who do you preffer?



## deprofundis (Apr 25, 2014)

This is a hard question to answer since i heard more of Schoenberg's work and very little of Anton Webern.

Sometime Schoenberg annoy me but Webern captivated me instantly, The ambience of passacaglia is 
dramatic and very grim.

When i think of Webern it feel like he was trapped in a regime an era the nazi germany , he did not wish, i can see sadness and anxiety in is music litteraly.He collaborated whit the regime not to get kill but in is head he felt sick of the regime.

Schoenberg who was is teacher were is spiritual or maybe more musical father, there fore i think he was jewish friendly and a bad nazi.He had a terrible end mistaken for an ss soldier he was shoot.

If webern had been more prolific than is teacher maybe he would had been greater.But in the end preffer Schoenberg because he is less bleak than webern, there is more light in his music.

Webern is good but his music is a bit depressing, for me at least..this is my verdict and two cents on serrialism.

I hope my post were worthy of TC :tiphat:


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

So far I'm more interested in Schoenberg, but like you I've heard very little Webern. I have only heard the Lansamer Satz for string quartet, the Six Bagatelles for string quartet, and Variations for piano, Op. 27. Each of these seems highly condensed. To belabor a metaphor, I almost feel I need to add water rather than try drinking them neat. Perhaps I should sip.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Webern 

...................


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Webern or Schoenberg? Hmmm. I'll split the difference and go with Alban Berg!


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

A hard question to answer. I might prefer Berg instead.


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

There's no Webern (Berg either) without Schoenberg. Is that easy to me.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

When I want to hear Schoenberg, then I want to hear Schoenberg; when I want to hear Webern, then I want to hear Webern: it depends on when you ask me.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Schoenberg tells better narratives, but Webern is more intensely emotional.


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2015)

I'm a less is more kind of


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Schoenberg hands down, though not forgetting of course Webern's Passacaglia and Im sommerwind. Less is bore! More importantly though, Webern's 12-tone music sounds like gibberish to me.



SeptimalTritone said:


> Webern is more intensely emotional.


:lol:


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Webern's music is beautiful! And as a whole, I think his oeuvre is much more enjoyable to me than Schoenberg's....partially because I can sit down and listen to it all in one night :lol:


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2015)

Now then don't start bickering or I'll have to flood the thread with bimbo pix.


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

dogen said:


> Now then don't start bickering or I'll have to flood with thread with bimbo pix.


Suffice it to say that there are enough bimbos commenting on this topic to save you the trouble of seeking said pics to post.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Polyphemus said:


> Suffice it to say that there are enough bimbos commenting on this topic to save you the trouble of seeking said pics to post.


I was gonna say, I didn't know marschallin blair has posted on this thread yet :devil:


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

This thread has inspired me to give my CD's of Schoenberg, Webern and Berg another spin.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

If I had to choose between the two, it would be Webern, no question. But that's because I love Renaissance polyphony, and his music is closest to it. But Schoenberg's no slouch, either.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

They can be used for different purposes. Schoenberg is one of the last "great" heroic composers, ending the Wagner/Brahms/Mahler bloodline. His works are monumental in most cases, and he has several important tonal works which establish his cred in that area.

Webern is not like that; he's more a modern figure to me, coming along after Schoenberg and expanding on the ideas, and becoming more rational and less Romantic. His techniques furthered the serial method in establishing a set of general, implicit concepts into serialism, thus helping make it as viable as tonality. True, he did *Im Sommerwind* and other important tonal works, but he mainly was thinking ahead into the future.

A caveat: the Second Viennese guys were all basically song writers, so this is an important aspect. In my opinion, Webern's lieder are even better than Schoenberg or Berg's.

I gotta have them both, though.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

I like both the young Schoenberg and the mature one. Webern seems to have matured early in his music, then progressed from there. I get the impression that some of his stuff is better heard with score supplement. The process is quicker than my mind can follow.


----------



## DTut (Jan 2, 2011)

Webern. If just for his 5 Satze op. 5. Schoenbergs' Verklarte Nacht isn't too shabby though. That Bach transcription he did is good as well. But I find Webern more interesting overall.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

I do listen to Webern occassionaly, like now for example (Concerto for 9 instruments), but mostly out of pure masochism.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Dim7 said:


> I do listen to Webern occassionaly, like now for example (Concerto for 9 instruments), but mostly out of pure masochism.


Does it sound random to you, or do you hear the patterns involved?

I'm interested to know how others perceive it, because when I listen to this, I can hear patterns and transformations of the musical material.






As for the OP's question, I love Webern's concision and expressive potency (especially the string quartet works, op. 6, and the Cantatas), but Schoenberg has a wider range of expression and a true gift for long-lined melodies and large developmental structures.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I'm still making inroads into the 2nd Viennese school works. I think at this time I might enjoy more of Schoenberg's works, but over the past couple of years I've found more and more of Webern that I enjoy.


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

Dim7 said:


> I do listen to Webern occassionaly, like now for example (Concerto for 9 instruments), but mostly out of pure masochism.


Oooh You are awful, but I like you.


----------



## Nocture In Blue (Jun 3, 2015)

Have to go with Schoenberg. I like a lot of his early music. But even when it comes to his 12 tone music I prefer him over Webern. Schoenberg is more spontaneous than Webern, and a bit more 'musical'. But there's something about Webern's sense for colours that I feel Schoenberg lacks. But my favourite composer of the Second Viennese School is definitely Alban Berg.

I apologize for my english, it's not very good. But I hope you can understand most of what I'm saying


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2015)

This thread has prompted me to listen to some more Webern. On Spotify I'm enjoying the Arditti Quartet album. In fact (!) it's quite superb!


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2015)

Mahlerian said:


> Does it sound random to you, or do you hear the patterns involved?
> 
> I'm interested to know how others perceive it, because when I listen to this, I can hear patterns and transformations of the musical material.
> 
> ...


Er...I hear good music. I don't know where the idea of "random" comes from. Random would be if I sat at a piano.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Mahlerian said:


> Does it sound random to you, or do you hear the patterns involved?
> 
> I'm interested to know how others perceive it, because when I listen to this, I can hear patterns and transformations of the musical material.
> 
> ...


The piano variations does sound quite random. If I was played an recorded imitation of Webern by some total amateur using all the 12 notes, lots of leaps and those stacccato rhythms (but no real consideration to the structure or any thought given to the piece, basically randomly jumping all over the keyboard), and after that a real Webern piece I haven't heard was played, I'm not sure I could tell which was the real Webern.

The concerto doesn't sound quite as random, but I'm also more familiar it (even "randomly" composed piece would sound less random after repeated listenings). I'm also aware how the tone row is structured, and I at least think I'm hearing some of that consistency given by that highly logical tone row.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

^Interesting! I'm not familiar with quite a lot of second Viennese school piano music but I could certainly pick out patterns in that piece.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Poor pattern recognition is another name for...


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Dim7 said:


> Poor pattern recognition is another name for...


There there, Dim7, I'm sure you would be able to recognise patterns in Einstein on the Beach


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

It's very comforting that somebody posted this comment in youtube about Schoenberg's Piano Concerto: "I keep trying to hear a melody, and keep failing. I'm sure these aren't random notes, but they may as well be." I'm baffled that anyone can perceive it that way. And maybe Webernites here are equally baffled that Webern's music sounds random to me.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

^ For Webern, my advice would be to focus on the "resultant" sounds and moods rather than too much on the individual notes, for worrying too much over the individual notes can make it feel random. Instead, focus on the resultant mood of the collective and the kaleidoscopic energy. Just a bit of advice for how I listen to Webern as a beginner.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Schönberg...........


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

..is like being forced to choose between raspberries or blackberries, why in the world would anyone want to give up either, makes no sense to me... ut:

/ptr


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Dim7 said:


> The piano variations does sound quite random. If I was played an recorded imitation of Webern by some total amateur using all the 12 notes, lots of leaps and those stacccato rhythms (but no real consideration to the structure or any thought given to the piece, basically randomly jumping all over the keyboard), and after that a real Webern piece I haven't heard was played, I'm not sure I could tell which was the real Webern.
> 
> The concerto doesn't sound quite as random, but I'm also more familiar it (even "randomly" composed piece would sound less random after repeated listenings). I'm also aware how the tone row is structured, and I at least think I'm hearing some of that consistency given by that highly logical tone row.


Well, I can't say I hear it that way myself, but I appreciate that you're honest!


----------

