# My problem with Dvorak



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

is that he is supposed to be quite like Brahms, yet I adore Brahms (top 3 or 4) but am left completely cold by Dvorak (as well as Tchaikovsky). 

What am I missing?


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

From the clues you give, I can only imagine that the composers you enjoy are deeper in their appreciation and learning of historical theory, ie. more personal about their musical discovery: what I mean by that is, not that Dvorak and Tchaikovsky aren't, but they approached composition from the very Classical 'perspective' of benefiting from the mainstream objective standards, not the 'style' of music being Classical, but the concept that there's been an objective standard amidst their current school that has evolved, which is what Classical composers believed. For Dvorak and Tchaikovsky, they banked on this Romantic standard, the potential of evolving safer, more-focused ideals of their time from previous Romantics, and they did so of course with much brilliance and talent. For instance they will emphasize stronger themes and structures that the public of the time tends to really relate to first upon hearing. Brahms on the other hand, takes a deeper learned approach of not relying as much on common views of the time, hence not restricting himself to one or the other. That's why critics and composers in particular were so surprised by his care and thoroughness towards evolving Classical music in light of the time he lived. There's also a bit of mixing of influences, for instance Schubert is arguably Classical and sounds like he clearly influenced Dvorak, whereas Tchaikovsky was influenced more by the modern school of Liszt, Berlioz, and popular music. Brahms would say his influences were predominantly the Big 3 and much less anyone else.


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

RogerWaters said:


> is that he is supposed to be quite like Brahms, yet I adore Brahms (top 3 or 4) but am left completely cold by Dvorak (as well as Tchaikovsky).
> 
> What am I missing?


you are missing listening to his Requiem


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Ethereality said:


> From the clues you gave, I can only imagine that the composers you enjoy are deeper in their learning and appreciation of historical theory, ie. more personal about how they approach music: that is not to say Dvorak and Tchaikovsky are not, but they do tend to approach composition from the more Classical 'perspective' of objective or mainstream standards that make more sense. For instance they will emphasize more strong themes and structures that the public tend to really relate to first upon hearing. Dvorak is a very popular composer in the mainstream.


Thanks for your reply. My top 4 are probably Bach, Beethoven, Mozat, Brahms. I prefer Schumann over Chopin, find Handel boring, and enjoy Ravel and Debussy (especially his late sonatas) - as well as Bruckner symphonies, Honegger, Haydn, early Stravinsky, Bartok, Berg and a lot of Baroque music (but not Vivaldi nor Telemann!).


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

aioriacont said:


> you are missing listening to his Requiem


I shall investigat and rectify!


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Dvorak's Symphony No. 7 is fairly Brahmsian.


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

RogerWaters said:


> I shall investigat and rectify!


be sure to check his symphonic poems too.

Wood Dove is amazing (it is also known as Wild Dove)


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Brahms himself at least was totally admiring Dvorak for his many beautiful melodies. If you listen to Dvoraks two serenades, his string quartets, his symphonies 8 & 9 and his Stabat Mater and his cello concerto, you can hear it for yourself. And if you compare Dvoraks music to Brahms without prejudice, it becomes quite clear that Brahms compositions are melodically more problematic, more of a struggle.


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

NLAdriaan said:


> it becomes quite clear that Brahms composing was more problematic, more of a struggle.


did Brahms tell you such personal information?


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

“did Brahms tell you such personal information?”

:lol:


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

RogerWaters said:


> is that he is supposed to be quite like Brahms, yet I adore Brahms (top 3 or 4) but am left completely cold by Dvorak (as well as Tchaikovsky).
> 
> What am I missing?


I'm totally with you my friend. Love Brahms; Dvorak leaves me cold. But as the music of Brahms did nothing for me for the longest time until it finally clicked (and I think I'm beginning to experience that "click" with Tchaikovsky as well), I will keep trying with Dvorak. Maybe I just haven't heard the right recordings. It took hearing the Klemperer/Philharmonia set for me to understand Brahms's symphonies.


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

flamencosketches said:


> I'm totally with you my friend. Love Brahms; Dvorak leaves me cold. But as the music of Brahms did nothing for me for the longest time until it finally clicked (and I think I'm beginning to experience that "click" with Tchaikovsky as well), I will keep trying with Dvorak. Maybe I just haven't heard the right recordings. It took hearing the Klemperer/Philharmonia set for me to understand Brahms's symphonies.


Music is like Dostojewskis ''Idiot'' The thirst time you read the book you say: Boring! The second: Boring but the Russian has many good pages! The third: The good pages are more than the boring ones. The fourth: My God! This is a masterpiece! etc...
(composer >>> cold? Nope! works >>>> cold? Yap! (I don't like Brahms symphonies. I like very much his PC, his VC, his piano works! Schubert: I'm not keen on his Lieder. I adore his PS, his piano works and many of his symphonies. We can't put a composer as an entity to refusal, especially when he is GIANT, like Antonin).


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Dimace said:


> Music is like Dostojewskis ''Idiot'' The thirst time you read the book you say: Boring! The second: Boring but the Russian has many good pages! The third: The good pages are more than the boring ones. The fourth: My God! This is a masterpiece! etc...
> (composer >>> cold? Nope! works >>>> cold? Yap! (I don't like Brahms symphonies. I like very much his PC, his VC, his piano works! Schubert: I'm not keen on his Lieder. I adore his PS, his piano works and many of his symphonies. We can't put a composer as an entity to refusal, especially when he is GIANT, like Antonin).


I'm sure the day will come where it all makes sense. I'm not giving up. If I see a Dvorak CD at the record store that looks interesting I'll usually pick it up and give it a try. As for Dostoyevsky, it was love on first read for me


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

It was the other way round for me (always loved Dvorak, thought Brahms was 'meh') and I actually didn't have too much Brahms when I came to this site (well apart from 4 or 5 symphony cycles that I didn't play but had picked up ridiculously cheaply in local library sales and secondhand book shop - Szell's set cost me the huge sum of £2). Now I love both even if I still prefer Dvorak on the whole. Fast forward to the current day and I have silly amounts of Brahms recordings. You may just need to hear a Dvorak recording that you can connect with, RW. Hope you find a way to enjoy Dvorak but don't beat herself up of it just doesn't happen. We can't all like the same stuff. Agree with a previous poster about trying Dvorak's 7th symphony though. It has a very Brahmsian feel to it. There are some superb accounts of it out there too. See the thread below for recommendations. The 8th is more bohemian in character but has some of Dvorak's best melodies. Never give up though.... Mahler (apart from the 1st symphony) took me years.

Best Recording of Dvorak Symphonies 7/8?


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_is that he is supposed to be quite like Brahms, yet I adore Brahms (top 3 or 4) but am left completely cold by Dvorak (as well as Tchaikovsky). What am I missing?_

I don't know what makes you think Brahms and Dvorak have much in common other than having lived the same time and written classical music.

Dvorak was a tunesmith and Brahms was more about structure, the difference between one being a romantic and expressing romantic ideas and the other a latter day classicist who often looked back and used forms from as far back as the Renaissance.

Emotionally they are not alike in any way. Other than the Brahmsian Symphony 7 Dvorak is typically upbeat, tuneful and generally happy. Brahms alternates between classically-driven power, introversion and melancholy. In addition Brahms was so insecure being in the shadow of Beethoven he destroyed many of his early compositions, the reason he never published a symphony until age 40.

Dvorak is generally the same composer temperamentally from day one to day zero. Brahms is all over the place -- youthful power in Symphony 1, some expression of happiness in Symphony 2 but introspection in much of the solo piano music, late life even old age reserve in the late chamber music, and the famous autumnal melancholy of Symphony 4 and his requiem.

The only place Brahms regularly showed high spirits were the Hungarian dances and other gypsy dances he put into his music. Dvorak on the other hand demonstrated a sunny disposition most of the time.

That's because Dvorak was for the most part a happy person and it shows. Even after leaving his home and going to America he wrote happy music -- the "American" string quartet and "New World" Symphony.

In his maturity Brahms was unhappy, had few friends, had no interest in making friends, had high profile fueds with Tchaikvosky and Bruckner, and longed for women he couldn't have. It shows in much of his music including the Alto Rhapsody that demonstrated his heartbreak over Robert Schumann's daughter marrying someone else. Brahms lusted after her.

The difference between Tchaikovsky and those two is he was even more excessively romantic, nearly late romantic, in his ideas. Structurally he is more akin to Dvorak employing romantic structures and gestures including tone poems named after romantic legends and symphonies written on themes such as fate and national identity.

Thus I don't think your "problem" is necessarily with Dvorak; it's probably more with high voltage romantic music.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Have no idea what you're missing, if anything. But since it hasn't come up: Have you listened to Dvorak's chamber music? It's as central to his work as it is to Brahms's.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I wonder if many examples of someone not liking this or that composer are not down to approaching the composer's music with the wrong expectations? OK Dvorak 7 is Brahms-like but I think if you go looking for Brahms in Dvorak then it may be no surprise that you end up disappointed. Their music is not so similar and the special things that make me adore Dvorak are not at all to be found in Brahms. Once he had digested the influences he worked through in his early works, he was very much his own man with a real gift for melody, for a sort of folk-inspired wildness and for invoking atmospheres. Possibly he is closer to Schumann than Brahms ... but he is not very like Schumann either.

EDIT - I hadn't read larold's post before posting this ... in many respects we are saying similar things.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I have a box set of Dvorak symphonies (Istvan Kertesz/LSO) collecting dust. Maybe I should try it again? I like that "Spinning Wheel" thing he did.

I heard that he was an excellent butcher as well.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Maybe I bought the wrong cycle? I have Neumann's later set which doesn't excite me very much. I have 8 & 9 by Szell, and 9 by Solti which I prefer. But along with Edward Bast I'm inclined to explore some of his chamber works other than string quartets.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

If you don't like Dvorak here's what you're missing: a heart! There is no composer who is so genial, tuneful, likeable. Nothing offends, grates on the ear. Sometimes he's long winded - some of tone poems I think go on too long. His writing is always idiomatic and just feels right in your hands when you play it. Try dancing to some of his music; the third movement of the 8th is great.

My introduction to Dvorak was the Wind Serenade op. 44. It's a wonderful, charming, exciting work start to finish. Try it!


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

RogerWaters said:


> What am I missing?


I think others on this thread have given you some excellent answers. Indeed, you may have some lingering prejudice about Dvorak's music or just may not have made that right "connection" yet. Like some, I too have long received a lot of pleasure from both Brahms _and_ Dvorak. I would suggest listening to the following if you have not already done so:

Symphony 7 Szell/Cleveland Orchestra
Symphony 8 Kertesz/London Symphony
Symphony 9 Kertesz/Vienna Philharmonic 
Cello Concerto opus 104
String Quartet 12 opus 96
String Quintet opus 97
Violin Concerto


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

RogerWaters said:


> Thanks for your reply. My top 4 are probably Bach, Beethoven, Mozat, Brahms. I prefer Schumann over Chopin, find Handel boring, and enjoy Ravel and Debussy (especially his late sonatas) - as well as Bruckner symphonies, Honegger, Haydn, early Stravinsky, Bartok, Berg and a lot of Baroque music (but not Vivaldi nor Telemann!).


Seems like we have strikingly similar tastes (though maybe I prefer Chopin over Schumann slightly)...


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

RogerWaters said:


> is that he is supposed to be quite like Brahms, yet I adore Brahms (top 3 or 4) but am left completely cold by Dvorak (as well as Tchaikovsky).
> 
> What am I missing?


I'm not sure why you have the impression that he's supposed to be like Brahms, because I don't hear him that way at all. Rather, I hear his music as a never-ending stream of _joie de vivre_, life-enhancing melodies, vigorous energy, and folk-inspired forms. Whenever I hear his music performed well by an ensemble that has the native Czech spirit in their blood, it makes me want to join in on the fun and joy of Slavic culture. Of course there is also a poignant, elegiac side to Dvorak expressed through his choral masterpieces Stabat Mater and Requiem, but I would recommend just trying to have fun when you listen to him. Try the Cello Concerto - Du Pre/Barenboim is my favorite - and the 2nd piano quintet. And if you haven't heard any "authentic" Czech performances of the symphonies and Slavonic Dances, you have to hear Neumann and Talich with the Czech Philharmonic! You can recognize that orchestra instantly.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Brahmsian Colors said:


> I think others on this thread have given you some excellent answers. Indeed, you may have some lingering prejudice about Dvorak's music or just may not have made that right "connection" yet. Like some, I too have long received a lot of pleasure from both Brahms _and_ Dvorak. I would suggest listening to the following if you have not already done so:
> 
> Symphony 7 Szell/Cleveland Orchestra
> Symphony 8 Kertesz/London Symphony
> ...


All excellent choices. I would also add the Piano Quintet op. 81 and the Czech Suite. I love the Stabat Mater and the Requiem, but they are Dvorak at his most long-winded.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Don't feel bad. I'm with you.
The only Dvorak symphony i really like is his 7th.
And the only Tchaikovsky piece i enjoy is the Nutcracker.
i like the 8th ok.
And a good chunk of his chamber music


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I love the 8th.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

It's surprising that so much beauty could come from a man of his appearance...


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I hear [Dvorak's]...music as a never-ending stream of _joie de vivre_, life-enhancing melodies, vigorous energy, and folk-inspired forms. Whenever I hear his music performed well by an ensemble that has the native Czech spirit in their blood, it makes me want to join in on the fun and joy of Slavic culture. Of course there is also a poignant, elegiac side to Dvorak...but I would recommend just trying to have fun when you listen to him.


My feelings to a T.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> It's surprising that so much beauty could come from a man of his appearance...


I think it came out of the hunk of meat in his head. They pretty much all look the same.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

RogerWaters said:


> is that he is supposed to be quite like Brahms, yet I adore Brahms (top 3 or 4) but am left completely cold by Dvorak (as well as Tchaikovsky).
> 
> What am I missing?


He's not really that much like Brahms (which is neither good nor bad).


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

larold said:


> I don't know what makes you think Brahms and Dvorak have much in common other than having lived the same time and written classical music.


I've recall reading it. It may, however, be my imagination!



larold said:


> Dvorak was a tunesmith and Brahms was more about structure, the difference between one being a romantic and expressing romantic ideas and the other a latter day classicist who often looked back and used forms from as far back as the Renaissance.
> 
> Emotionally they are not alike in any way. Other than the Brahmsian Symphony 7 Dvorak is typically upbeat, tuneful and generally happy. Brahms alternates between classically-driven power, introversion and melancholy. In addition Brahms was so insecure being in the shadow of Beethoven he destroyed many of his early compositions, the reason he never published a symphony until age 40.
> 
> ...


Thank you, this rings true to me to some degree. Particulary the 'tunesmith' vs 'structiralist' description.

I'm not sure about having a problem with high voltage Romantic music, as I love Wagner, Bruckner, Sibelius. Nor is my problem with cheerful music, as such, as I love Haydn's late symphonies and string quartets, for example.

Dvorak comes across to me as utilitarian, obvious, and populist-rustic (at times). His New World symphony, for example, strikes me as a movie soundtrack from a cheesy 50s adventure film.

I don't mind his Cello Concerto.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I once described my own "problem" with Dvorak as "he was so damn Slavonic." Nevertheless, in driving across the country in 1974, I did detour through Spillville, Iowa, where he summered when he was in this county.

It's more a question of learning from Brahms, rather than any natural musical affinity. As someone once said, "borrowing his stencils." For instance the sets of Hungarian and Slavonic Dances. Or the finales of their D major symphonies (Brahms 2 Dvorak 6), with their same headlong rhythmic profiles.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Listen to the Brahms piano quintet followed by Dvorak's Op. 81 and you won't think the two composers are similar. But they both wrote some of the finest chamber music of the 19th century.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Woodduck said:


> Listen to the Brahms piano quintet followed by Dvorak's Op. 81 and you won't think the two composers are similar. But they both wrote some of the finest chamber music of the 19th century.


I have, and disagree wholeheartedly.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

RogerWaters said:


> I have, and disagree wholeheartedly.


Brahms' late chamber works (especially the clarinet quintet) sound obscure, labyrinthine, and hyper-intellectual (in a good way) whereas Dvoraks' (like the aforementioned piano quintet no.2) are always lyrical, melodious, and dramatic, the music just flows naturally. I don't think it's just melody vs structure but Brahms was writing some crazy harmonies (not in the Debussy sense of course).


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

There are times when the aesthetics of Brahms and Dvorak seem to collide (Brahms’s string quintets, for example, certainly wouldn’t be amiss in the Czech’s ouevre) because they both had a strong folk influence, but outside of that I don’t think it’s very useful to compare them. Brahms was reported to have given up writing his cello concerto because Dvorak’s was so close to his own ideal, which is an interesting thing to chew on.


----------



## neofite (Feb 19, 2017)

RogerWaters said:


> Dvorak comes across to me as utilitarian, obvious, and populist-rustic (at times). His New World symphony, for example, strikes me as a movie soundtrack from a cheesy 50s adventure film.
> 
> I don't mind his Cello Concerto.


Are you serious??


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Dvorak is surely one of the greatest tunesmiths ever....take his Slavonic Dances - they're a feast of great melodies, one after another, beautiful, very "cat friendly hy" melodies....i always find these delicious melodies rattling around in my head whenever i perform any of these charming works....


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

RogerWaters said:


> I'm not sure about having a problem with high voltage Romantic music, as I love Wagner, Bruckner, Sibelius. Nor is my problem with cheerful music, as such, as I love Haydn's late symphonies and string quartets, for example.
> 
> Dvorak comes across to me as utilitarian, obvious, and populist-rustic (at times). His New World symphony, for example, strikes me as a movie soundtrack from a cheesy 50s adventure film.
> 
> I don't mind his Cello Concerto.


I wonder if you are 150 years old? Your view of Dvorak was quite common in the early part of the 20th century. But by the time I was born (1950s) the view was widely dismissed as snobbish. But really I guess that, as in most cases of someone not liking a widely loved composer, your view is a result of not having enough familiarity ... and why should you? You don't like the music so why should you listen to it again and again?


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

Enthusiast said:


> I wonder if you are 150 years old? Your view of Dvorak was quite common in the early part of the 20th century. But by the time I was born (1950s) the view was widely dismissed as snobbish. But really I guess that, as in most cases of someone not liking a widely loved composer, your view is a result of not having enough familiarity ... and why should you? You don't like the music so why should you listen to it again and again?


ah, now I get why so many people here love rant, fight, and make pretentious posts.
Baby boomers generations, from the 50's and 60's. The same people who love to yell at humble workers in stores humiliating them and saying "i want to talk the manager!"


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

"yes, let's break economy!"

Baby Boomers, wow!


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Weird to define people (all of them) according to their ages. And in any case, perhaps things are different in America (I feel sure you must be American), but my generation turned out to be quite a rebellious one. Anyway I am not sure that I know or ever knew people who fit the stereotype you seek to peddle and I find that age does not determine (not at all) who I get on with and who I avoid.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

RogerWaters said:


> I have, and disagree wholeheartedly.


With what? That Dvorak and Brahms are very different, or that they both wrote superb chamber music? You said you adore Brahms, but that Dvorak leaves you cold. It would appear that you find them significantly different. But if you don't hear the excellence of Dvorak's chamber music, it's unlikely that anyone is going to convince you of it.

Asking other people "what we're missing" in music we don't like is rarely productive of a change of heart. Just return to the music periodically, and eventually you may discover what you're missing now.


----------



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

RogerWaters said:


> _His New World symphony, for example, strikes me as a movie soundtrack from a cheesy 50s adventure film._


So he was over half a century ahead of his time, then? :devil:


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> I wonder if you are 150 years old? Your view of Dvorak was quite common in the early part of the 20th century. But by the time I was born (1950s) the view was widely dismissed as snobbish. But really I guess that, as in most cases of someone not liking a widely loved composer, your view is a result of not having enough familiarity ... and why should you? You don't like the music so why should you listen to it again and again?


I was born in the 1990s and I hold a similar view. I think it's unwise bringing age into it. More likely the second part of your post has something to do with it, but I find myself consistently disappointed by my frequent attempts into Dvorák's music. Alas. Perhaps some day it will all make sense.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

This reminds me of my dad, who has been a moderate collector of discs for decades, having preference for a variety of stuff such as Mozart and Beethoven quintets for piano and winds, violin and cello sonatas, Beethoven pathetique sonata, archduke trio etc, Bach cello suites, Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky violin concertos, and Schubert Trout quintet etc etc. 
I find it funny he sometimes says things like:
_"Brahms? Isn't he like a Beethoven-copycat? He doesn't even have his own style."
"Dvorak? I don't care for second-rates like him. Why listen to his music, when you can listen to Mozart and Beethoven."_

I play classical music from the audio whenever I drive with him. He once praised Chopin's polish songs when I played them. But also, I remember two occasions when he said _"street dance music"_ to describe music played: one was Dvorak's American quartet and the other was Brahms's fourth symphony.
As the symphony neared its end, he said: _"This is like street dance music."_
I protested: _"What makes you think that way? Haven't you listened from the beginning? The epic drama that unfolds through these unsettling, passionate utterances of Brahms?"_
He replied: _"So you like this stuff? Good for you. But I've had enough of this meandering music. Play something else for god's sake. Why not Haydn?"_

It's sometimes interesting how people see things differently. lol. btw, I find it a bit of a coincidence that he was born exactly 200 years after Mozart was born, I was born 200 years after Mozart died.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Woodduck said:


> With what? That Dvorak and Brahms are very different, or that they both wrote superb chamber music? You said you adore Brahms, but that Dvorak leaves you cold. It would appear that you find them significantly different. But if you don't hear the excellence of Dvorak's chamber music, it's unlikely that anyone is going to convince you of it.
> 
> Asking other people "what we're missing" in music we don't like is rarely productive of a change of heart. Just return to the music periodically, and eventually you may discover what you're missing now.


That D wrote superb chamber music.

I did not (intend to) ask what I was missing from Dvorak's music. I intended to ask what I was missing in the comparison between the two compoers. But Perhaps I should have been clearer.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> I wonder if you are 150 years old? Your view of Dvorak was quite common in the early part of the 20th century. But by the time I was born (1950s) the view was widely dismissed as snobbish. But really I guess that, as in most cases of someone not liking a widely loved composer, your view is a result of not having enough familiarity ... and why should you? You don't like the music so why should you listen to it again and again?


I was born in the first half of the 1980s. However, i've read too much Nietzsche not to consider myself a reincarnated aristocrat.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

My Problem With Dvor --- *Acck!*

I just listened to Dvorak's Symphony No. 7 in D minor. My impression was that it's melodic-based, not counterpoint but homophonic: a melody on top of some chords. It strikes me as "pretty" but simplistic. It sounds like piano music that was transcribed.
That's the first two movements; the second half is more interesting, with more counter-lines popping up. But all-in-all, forgettable.

I'm like hammeredklavier's dad: _"Dvorak? I don't care for second-rates like him. Why listen to his music, when you can listen to Mozart and Beethoven."

_I will follow Woodduck's advice (and I've heard KenOC say the same thing), and look to his chamber music.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

RogerWaters said:


> I was born in the first half of the 1980s. However, i've read too much Nietzsche not to consider myself a reincarnated aristocrat.


That's it, then! You are channeling a view that used to be widespread.


----------

