# Brahms vs. Schumann: Who wrote the better melodies?



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

It's acknowledged that both Brahms and Schumann emphasized texture and harmony over melody, but I think both also ended up with some real earworms. 

In your opinion, who had the better gift for melody? Feel free to list your favorite examples.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Schumann: The usual mentions such as the Piano Concerto and the Symphony #2 and then the lesser known:

Schumann Widmung (written especially for Clara):






Schumann Violin Concerto Langsam:






Brahms: Piano Concertos 1 & 2 Adagios (especially #1)

And lesser known:

Brahms Intermezzo 118#2 (I hear a strong Schumann influence)


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

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


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

hammeredklavier said:


> Well, is there a Brahms piano miniature that's as good as this in terms of melody?:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why such concern for 'commonplace' melody, when it's one of the weakest features of classical composers? For classical melody, Brahms I would say fits a more complicated appeal, nothing that really stands out but hooks you enough ie. worth additional listens. While Schumann is more creative overall, has more of an implicit listening appeal, ie. you will come back and a piece takes on a different meaning. For this reason I think Schumann is a better composer, but I can't pin down any melodic preference.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

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


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Two of my all-time favorites for melody. Maybe even my two favorites.

Going with "about equal".


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> Two of my all-time favorites for melody. Maybe even my two favorites.
> 
> Going with "about equal".


That's what I went with too. Every time I think of a great Brahms melody, I'm able to find a Schumann melody to match it. And vice versa.

There's the Brahms Intermezzo in A but then what about the Schumann Intermezzo in Eb?


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> Well, is there a Brahms piano miniature that's as good as this in terms of melody?:


Maybe this comes close:








hammeredklavier said:


> also there's no piano sonata by Brahms that's as brimming with melodies as Schumann's second.


Even though I love Brahms' sonatas, the melodic powers are admittedly relatively weak when compared to Schumann's sonatas. Especially Schumann's slow movements of the 1st and 2nd.

But Brahms easily matched Schumann's melody writing when it came to concerti:


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Clearly Schumann for me.

Around 2:15.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Probably Schumann, who excelled with miniature scale works where the melody thrived. Brahms was a craftsman who wanted to perfect every note he wrote and so the melody got buried a little. Both are great, canon composers nonetheless.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

chu42 said:


> That's what I went with too. Every time I think of a great Brahms melody, I'm able to find a Schumann melody to match it. And vice versa.
> 
> There's the Brahms Intermezzo in A but then what about the Schumann Intermezzo in Eb?


Oh yes thank you for reminding me of this piece. I hadn't listened to it in years and forgot it existed.

It's quintessential Schumann. Achingly beautiful.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Ethereality said:


> Why such concern for 'commonplace' melody, when it's one of the weakest features of classical composers? For classical melody, Brahms I would say fits a more complicated appeal, nothing that really stands out but hooks you enough ie. worth additional listens. While Schumann is more creative overall, has more of an implicit listening appeal, ie. you will come back and a piece takes on a different meaning. For this reason I think Schumann is a better composer, but I can't pin down any melodic preference.


I think this is the biggest difference between Schumann and Brahms. Obviously Brahms was heavily influenced by Schumann, and both were influenced by Beethoven, but fundamentally they were vastly different craftsman.

Brahms was a perfectionist and a technical master. I wouldn't say that he's not creative but creativity certainly wasn't the strength of his style. He was harmonically innovative but only in the most subtle sense, whereas Wagner and Liszt were scoping out entirely new paths.

On the other hand, Schumann made up for his relative lack of technical brilliance with imagination and inspiration. He could never churn out uniformly-excellent Preludes or Nocturnes like Chopin, but Schumann's gems are some of the most valuable gems in the classical depository.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> In your opinion, who had the better gift for melody?


What is "better", and what is a "gift"? How is it measured?


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

consuono said:


> What is "better", and what is a "gift"? How is it measured?


Oh boy, I knew you would come here saying stuff like that. Which is why I made sure to write all the proper things like "in your opinion", and "I think", but you still don't seem to get it.

Since it's your _opinion_, you get to judge what constitutes as "gift" or what constitutes as "better." I might think one melody is good, and you might disagree. Neither of us are right or wrong, it's just our opinions. Not very difficult to understand.

Whereas the person who thinks music can be ranked objectively (cough cough, you) is the one who has to come up with objective definitions for ideas like "gift" and "better".


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

chu42 said:


> Oh boy, I knew you would come here saying stuff like that. Which is why I made sure to write all the proper things like "in your opinion", and "I think", but you still don't seem to get it. ...


They're your terms. You must have some problems with the concept yourself. Mean what you say and say what you mean. It's not hard to understand.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

consuono said:


> They're your terms. You must have some problems with the concept yourself. Mean what you say and say what you mean. It's not hard to understand.


Yeah. They're my terms, they mean something to me. I don't have to define them though since I acknowledge that they mean different things to different people, which is why they are subjective.

If my terms for "gift" and "better" were the exact same as everyone else, then everyone would be in unanimous agreement with me and I wouldn't be making a poll on it.

Do you often make polls on questions that can be objectively decided? Do you make polls asking whether or not charcoal contains carbon?


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Guys, take it elsewhere.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> Guys, take it elsewhere.


I tried my best to eliminate any possibility of repeating this inane discussion, yet here we are.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

chu42 said:


> I tried my best to eliminate any possibility of repeating this inane discussion, yet here we are.


The best try would be to not engage in it.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

They are both melodically better than each other, but I'll reluctantly go with Schumann by a hair if only for the complex meandering melody in the final movement of his PC.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I’ve had my disagreements with chu42 over issues regarding objectivity, but in all fairness to him, I don’t think the OP could have been any clearer about it being simply a question of our opinion which, at least for me, assumes my subjective opinion on the question.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

DaveM said:


> I've had my disagreements with chu42 over issues regarding objectivity, but in all fairness to him, I don't think the OP could have been any clearer about it being simply a question of our opinion which, at least for me, assumes my subjective opinion on the question.


Thank you. We have our disagreements about objectivity but we can have a conventional discussion about our opinions of composers without incessantly circling back to that topic.

That's that and this is this. I won't hold anything that you said in other threads over your head.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Weston said:


> They are both melodically better than each other, but I'll reluctantly go with Schumann by a hair if only for the complex meandering melody in the final movement of his PC.


You mean this?






Really great stuff


----------



## pjang23 (Oct 8, 2009)

I would say about even, though melodiousness isn't really the stand-out feature of either composer's music compared to the unique textural sound worlds they create.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> Two of my all-time favorites for melody. Maybe even my two favorites.
> 
> Going with "about equal".


Wait, I thought you believed Brahms' melodic ability was overall very poor, deficient and the weakest part of his skillset.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> Wait, I thought you believed Brahms' melodic ability was overall very poor, deficient and the weakest part of his skillset.


You know Brahms was so good at everything that despite being the greatest melodist of all time it might still be the weakest part of his skill set :lol:


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> You know Brahms was so good at everything that despite being the greatest melodist of all time it might still be the weakest part of his skill set :lol:


Yea, I still think there's more to Brahms than just melodies. His last symphony is magical - It strikes me as something only Brahms would have come up with.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

hammeredklavier said:


> Yea, I still think there's more to Brahms than just melodies. His last symphony is magical - It strikes me as something only Brahms would have come up with.


It's also his least tuneful strictly speaking, yet very lyrical from the onset.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

The poll would have been interesting to include say Schubert, Mendelssohn who were good melody writers. But Brahms and Schumann were great at their respective pockets of composition anyway.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Easily Brahms for me. His works are brimming with great melodies. Piano Concertos, Sym 4 Slow movement, Piano trios the list goes on and on. Schumann never really clicked with me though i havent listened to everything but definitely Brahms. Very surprised im in the minority


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Of course, Brahms quoted Schumann directly in the opening, descending theme of Sym 3/I....Schumann used it twice, at least, iirc...in his Spring and Rhenish symphonies...


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Heck148 said:


> Of course, Brahms quoted Schumann directly in the opening, descending theme of Sym 3/I....Schumann used it twice, at least, iirc...in his Spring and Rhenish symphonies...


Brahms quotes Schumann quite often. They both quote Beethoven as well.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

chu42 said:


> Brahms quotes Schumann quite often. They both quote Beethoven as well.


and all three quote Mozart as well.
Brahms: [ Op.15/i , K.491/i ] , [ Op.83/iv , K.595/iii ] 
Schumann: It might be a bit of a stretch, but maybe Mozart K.475 (
View attachment 148131
) was an inspiration for Schumann Op.17, and K.466/iii for Op.120/i.
Maybe the next person commenting on this thread should show us how four of them quote Sebas.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> Schumann: It might be a bit of a stretch, but maybe Mozart K.475 (
> View attachment 148131
> ) was an inspiration for Schumann Op.17, and K.466/iii for Op.120/i.


Schumann seems more definitively influenced by Mozart in these figurations: [ Op.14/iii , K.394 ]


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Brahms was probably more influenced by Bach as far as the previous generations of greats were concerned. Schumann was too, maybe less so.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

> Maybe the next person commenting on this thread should show us how four of them quote Sebas.





> Brahms was probably more influenced by Bach as far as the previous generations of greats were concerned. Schumann was too, maybe less so.


I see more Bach in Schumann than almost any other Romantic era composer. Here are some Schumann excerpts that can be attributed to direct Bach influence:

WoO 31

Op.7

Op.13/8 (Think the Fugue No.5 from WTC Book 1)

Op.16/6

Op.16/7

Op.20/3 (This vaguely fugue-like section more resembles Beethoven than Bach, but it is still highly Baroque in its counterpoint)

Op.22 (Highly reminiscent of Bach slow movements in his concerti)

Op.41/1 (Who before Schumann has started a string quartet with a fugal motif?)

Op.44/4

Op.56

Op.60

Op.61/3 (This sounds like Mozart, but it's also Mozart at his most Bach-like. Very Passion-esque.)

Op.68/40

Op.72

Op.105/3

Op.121/2 (Partial quotation of Bach's BWV 91)

Op.121/3 (Highly influenced by Bach's contrapuntal violin writing)

Op.126

To me, Schumann seems more Bach-like than Brahms because Schumann likes very rigid rhythms, while Brahms' famous love for hemiola is something that would never appear in Bach's music.


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

This is a tough call. But I give the edge to Schumann. His piano concerto’s first mvmt is an absolute melancholic melodic and romantic masterpiece. Alone for this he gets the razor sharp edged vote from me.


----------



## Caryatid (Mar 28, 2020)

chu42 said:


> Op.13/8 (Think the Fugue No.5 from WTC Book 1)
> 
> Op.16/6


To me these two examples have more to do with Bach's keyboard suites than with the fugues. Bach had a habit of opening the second half of a suite with French overture rhythms - as in Goldberg Variation No. 16, the opening of Partita No. 4, and BWV 681 from the Clavier-Ubung III. Schumann seems to have liked the idea and incorporated it into the Symphonic Etudes. Similar sections are in Kreisleriana and Waldszenen, albeit not in the exact middle of the piece.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Caryatid said:


> To me these two examples have more to do with Bach's keyboard suites than with the fugues. Bach had a habit of opening the second half of a suite with French overture rhythms - as in Goldberg Variation No. 16, the opening of Partita No. 4, and BWV 681 from the Clavier-Ubung III. Schumann seems to have liked the idea and incorporated it into the Symphonic Etudes. Similar sections are in Kreisleriana and Waldszenen, albeit not in the exact middle of the piece.


But the Fugue No.5 also represents French overture rhythms:






But yes, many examples of these rhythms show up in Bach's work.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Interesting, I hear Bach more in Brahms by that I mean in the approach rather than the raw melody/variations of it. It's a shame Schumann developed mental problems, he would have composed many more great works later.


----------



## BeatriceB (May 3, 2021)

Schumann probably wrote better melodies with his piano music. Brahms was more about theme and variations but he did well with his chamber music too.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I think both composers are bound to be underrated wrt melody if one focuses on their instrumental music. The wrote a lot of tremendously good lieder and choral works (although Brahms sometimes used folk tunes in some vocal music). Admittedly, even in vocal music their melodies are often not as immediately striking as Schubert's, there are still a lot of very good ones. I voted "about equal", I got much earlier into Brahms' instrumental music and hesitate to name as supremely melodic movements from Schumann as e.g. Brahms' G major violin sonata, 2nd clarinet sonata, B major trio etc. but prefer Schumann's lieder (although I find Brahms underrated in this department).


----------



## Saxman (Jun 11, 2019)

chu42 said:


> It's acknowledged that both Brahms and Schumann emphasized texture and harmony over melody,


It is? They did? Where do you get this from?


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

I don't care who wrote the better melodies, I enjoy Brahms infinitely more than I do Schumann.


----------



## Gold Member (Aug 23, 2021)

I feel like Brahms builds his work a lot more on melody, where as Schumann just hits the sweetest spots, like a predetermined fractal mechanism. A Schumann melody can send you momentarily straight to heaven, while a Brahms melody will stick with you like a guardian angel. Personally, Schumann is one of my favorite composers, whereas I don't believe Brahms has ever written a bad note, I doubt even the ones consumed by fire, but he's not quite a top favorite.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Red Terror said:


> I don't care who wrote the better melodies, I enjoy Brahms infinitely more than I do Schumann.


Yeah Brahms is one of my favorite composers especially for solo piano works. Havent really clicked with Schumann yet. Have to work on that.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Ditto. There are some Brahms works I love very much whereas, while I certainly don't have a problem with Schumann, nothing he wrote comes close to being that meaningful for me.


----------



## Yabetz (Sep 6, 2021)

I think Schumann was the more gifted melodist (many of his Lieder are exquisite) while Brahms was more gifted at structure and thematic development.


----------

