# I find Brahms lacks emotions in his works. Is this just me?



## Guest

I have recently heard Double Concerto, Piano Concerto No. 1 and 2, Horn Trio, Symphony No. 1 and 4 and Violin Concerto. I find his works to have a complex structure and expansive is length but i feel that there is a lack of emotional expression which i find in other composers such as Chopin [Despite my lack of any attachment for his works. That is an achievement within itself]

NOTE: I have posted in both threads for a larger and more unique approach.

NOTE: I have merged the two threads as they have the identical title and OP.


----------



## StevenOBrien

Maybe try starting with the shorter works?


----------



## KenOC

Maybe you're looking for the wrong thing. Many composers, and the best ones, often don't try to project an "emotion." They want you to share a frame of mind, a state of mind, that you might not otherwise imagine. To me, that's the true reward of their labors.


----------



## Art Rock

Try the clarinet quintet.


----------



## PetrB

If feeling deeply emotional about a piece of music (more accurately, its emotive content) was the primary criterion of what great music is, I'm estimating that at least 75% of the entire repertoire, and at least that much of what is now generally agreed upon as 'great,' would not be in circulation.

Too, if you don't find emotion in a piece of music, it is not without emotion, but an emotion or sentiment you do not know or recognize.

Ergo, not your cuppa, at least not at whatever chapter of your life you are in at present.

I find more emotion in Brahms than any of Tchaikovsky: moreover, nearly the entire mid to late romantic era (post Schumann until Mahler entered the scene) leaves me if not cold, 'untouched.' Not _my_ cuppa.... I do 'keep checking in with music of that period, have done for decades, but, still _not my cuppa_. I don't feel weird about it, nor 'left out,' or that I am missing anything of real importance -- for me only.

Since I've _had_ to play a fair amount of it, like any good actor playing a role they are less than in love with, I can more than convince, and not convey any dislike or lack of feeling (hell, I nearly revile most musical theater, and have turned in the same very convincing sort of performance.) As a pro, that is part of the job.

As a listener only, you have no such obligations


----------



## Andreas

True, Brahms' music lacks the sentimentality, neuroticism and hysterics of the Wagnerian era. He was a classicist, in that regard.


----------



## PetrB

Andreas said:


> True, Brahms' music lacks the sentimentality, neuroticism and hysterics of the Wagnerian era. He was a classicist, in that regard.


Some listeners, not only neophytes, most recognize the high dramatics and, as you put it, the near hysteria of 'bigger Beethoven,' then the later romantics, sometimes to the near exclusion of all the rest of classical music's literature... and it is no more than a matter of personal taste, or "how they prefer to use classical music."


----------



## JohannesBrahms

It could just be that Brahms doesn't arouse your emotions as much as Chopin. I love Brahms and have listened to many of his works. Over time, I can feel more emotion in Brahms than I did at first. It may simply be that you need to listen to a lot of Brahms to understand him. Whether this is the same for you, I don't know.


----------



## Ukko

If you are asking for sympathy, you have mine; It isn't _only_ you, but it _is_ _just_ you. Emotion is in there; its expression is moderately idiosyncratic (one can be distracted), but there is a sufficiency of it.


----------



## Norse

I can find in Brahms a greater emotional depth than almost any other composer. (Like with any other composer this of course varies with the work in question) This is a little interesting given the cliché of Brahms as the formalist/classicist vs someone like Liszt.


----------



## GodNickSatan

I find his works extremely lacking in any decent emoticons. :tiphat:


----------



## Kazaman

I find Brahms has plenty of emotion ...

... now what? That's the problem I have with debates centred on taste; there's nothing to debate, there's no substance. If you want to have a good discussion you're better off not straying from the essence of the music. We could talk about emotional restraint and release in Brahms, but only if you're willing to look at specific examples of his music rather than opining.


----------



## starry

Agreed on the clarinet quintet, also the 4th symphony. I see you heard the latter but perhaps it wasn't a great performance, listen to Furtwangler in it. Bad performances can make music seem lacking in much feeling, Mozart's music has had to suffer that at times as has the work of other composers.


----------



## Ravndal

So much undeserved hate against Brahms on this forum, especially against his piano works. I don't get it.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

Brahms never lacks emotion. Maybe he doesn't go overboard with his emotions but he never lacks it. The opening chord of his first piano concerto says it all. The adagio mesto of his horn trio is beautiful, and the slow movement of his 4th symphony moves one to tears, while the scherzo makes one want to dance.


----------



## moody

GodNickSatan said:


> I find his works extremely lacking in any decent emoticons. :tiphat:


OK,OK, what about indecent emoticons ??


----------



## moody

Ravndal said:


> So much undeserved hate against Brahms on this forum, especially against his piano works. I don't get it.


But we know better don't we ?


----------



## Ukko

Ravndal said:


> So much undeserved hate against Brahms on this forum, especially against his piano works. I don't get it.


I'm pretty sure it has to do with Brahms' way of getting from the beginning to the end. The signposts often don't point to where he's going, the scenery isn't the expected.


----------



## Vaneyes

A karajan handle dissing Brahms?


----------



## Guest

I actually find lots of emotion in Brahms' works. The German Requiem and the Piano Trio No. 1, in particular. He is not so much "heart on your sleeve" emotion as other Romantic composers, but then Brahms didn't see himself in that light. He considered himself more of a classicist, and looked backward, towards figures like Beethoven. He was very conservative in this respect. Still, the emotion is there. Is the problem in the recordings you have chosen?


----------



## moody

Hilltroll72 said:


> I'm pretty sure it has to do with Brahms' way of getting from the beginning to the end. The signposts often don't point to where he's going, the scenery isn't the expected.


I think you are playing your CD's backwards again.


----------



## Ukko

moody said:


> I think you are playing your CD's backwards again.


Maybe... it ain't the booze.


----------



## joen_cph

moody said:


> I think you are playing your CD's backwards again.


So it isn´t smharB? All this explains a lot about this fellow´s apparent popularity then.


----------



## niv

Try giving the 4th Symphony another spin. Listening to it right now, and it's sure packed with emotions


----------



## Novelette

I've never any hollowness in Brahms' works.

Hilltroll is certainly right that it cannot be the booze; a little dry sherry goes perfectly with Brahms, and does nothing to empty his music of passion.


----------



## Eschbeg

Norse said:


> I can find in Brahms a greater emotional depth than almost any other composer... This is a little interesting given the cliché of Brahms as the formalist/classicist vs someone like Liszt.


It is interesting, and perhaps an indication that the conflation of formalism and classicism, as well as the polarization of emotion and classicism, are habits of a bygone era that we should finally discard. (Especially with Brahms who, contrary to the prevailing image we have of him today, was an admirer of Wagner; meanwhile Hans von Bülow, nominally a Wagnerian and therefore supposed to be an anti-Brahmsian according to the same prevailing image, was an admirer of Brahms.)


----------



## KenOC

Brahms's "classically reserved" approach to music is often contrasted with Tchaikovsky, who "wore his heart on his sleeve." But nowadays I find Brahms sometimes *too* emotional, in a kind of stifling way, and find Tchaikovsky a relief from that.


----------



## bigshot

karajan said:


> I find his works to have a complex structure and expansive is length but i feel that there is a lack of emotional expression which i find in other composers such as Chopin


I think that is pretty clearly a problem with performances, not the compositions themselves. Especially with Chopin, whose work is extremely passionate in the right hands (ie: Rubinstein).


----------



## Sonata

Ravndal said:


> So much undeserved hate against Brahms on this forum, especially against his piano works. I don't get it.


Yes, this makes me


----------



## hreichgott

Op. 118


----------



## Kazaman

hreichgott said:


> Op. 118
> View attachment 17183


Scrumptious.


----------



## millionrainbows

There's plenty of drama, but it somehow lacks sincerity, and seems contrived. I want to slap him out of his hysteria and say "Get a grip, dude! She'll never love you! I told you you should have lost the beard! I can smell that thing from here..."


----------



## Guest

Kazaman said:


> I find Brahms has plenty of emotion ...
> 
> ... now what? That's the problem I have with debates centred on taste; there's nothing to debate, there's no substance. If you want to have a good discussion you're better off not straying from the essence of the music. We could talk about emotional restraint and release in Brahms, but only if you're willing to look at specific examples of his music rather than opining.


I am more than happy to start a thoughtful discussion on his music and have no opinion while doing so. I would love to check out any example of his musical works which you might demonstrate.



starry said:


> Agreed on the clarinet quintet, also the 4th symphony. I see you heard the latter but perhaps it wasn't a great performance, listen to Furtwangler in it. Bad performances can make music seem lacking in much feeling, Mozart's music has had to suffer that at times as has the work of other composers


I have heard Karajan's and Kleiber's fourth. They both are widely considered one of the best recording of the fourth. Also, am i the only one who gets a very magical imagination while listening to the piece? The piece makes me think of all sorts of wizard and magical places. It's opening is indeed spell-binding.



Andreas said:


> True, Brahms' music lacks the sentimentality, neuroticism and hysterics of the Wagnerian era. He was a classicist, in that regard.


I know this may sound stupid but might i ask what is the distinction between a classical and romantic composition. From what i have heard, romantic compositions are showy and sometimes unnecessarily complex.



PetrB said:


> If feeling deeply emotional about a piece of music (more accurately, its emotive content) was the primary criterion of what great music is, I'm estimating that at least 75% of the entire repertoire, and at least that much of what is now generally agreed upon as 'great,' would not be in circulation.
> 
> Too, if you don't find emotion in a piece of music, it is not without emotion, but an emotion or sentiment you do not know or recognize.
> 
> Ergo, not your cuppa, at least not at whatever chapter of your life you are in at present.
> 
> I find more emotion in Brahms than any of Tchaikovsky: moreover, nearly the entire mid to late romantic era (post Schumann until Mahler entered the scene) leaves me if not cold, 'untouched.' Not _my_ cuppa.... I do 'keep checking in with music of that period, have done for decades, but, still _not my cuppa_. I don't feel weird about it, nor 'left out,' or that I am missing anything of real importance -- for me only.
> 
> Since I've _had_ to play a fair amount of it, like any good actor playing a role they are less than in love with, I can more than convince, and not convey any dislike or lack of feeling (hell, I nearly revile most musical theater, and have turned in the same very convincing sort of performance.) As a pro, that is part of the job.
> 
> As a listener only, you have no such obligations


Yes, you are correct. I am 14 and have quite a big compilation of music for over a year but have started really listening attentively since the past 3 months. I am told that at my age it is difficult to really understand and appreciate the beauty of slower movements. Is it because of lack of patience which i naturally inherit or am i just a spoilt brat XD.



Ravndal said:


> So much undeserved hate against Brahms on this forum, especially against his piano works. I don't get it.


Not true, this thread alone shows the amount of supporters Brahms has.



bigshot said:


> I think that is pretty clearly a problem with performances, not the compositions themselves. Especially with Chopin, whose work is extremely passionate in the right hands (ie: Rubinstein).


I own a CD box set of Brahms Orchestral works by Wolfgang Sawallisch. I read the reviews on Amazon which said the performances were quite good. So i certainly do not think there is an issue with the performances themselves.

In the end, i suppose the only solution is concentrated and multiple listening until i finally start feeling the emotions and appreciate his works. Correct??


----------



## Ravndal

This is not the first Brahms thread. Been several other thread where people have actually said that Brahms was a crappy melodist, and the piano music is bad.

Which i will never forget.


----------



## PetrB

The contemporary, dare I say more superficial 'Carnival' style of patently obvious 'drama' -- Slam, boom, waah, emo, 'what is subtlety?' will not be found in less contemporary works.

Access to the ethos of another age means -- uh, oh, 'historical context'. Historical context goes far beyond knowing some politics and dates of main events, or 'mere' sociology. It means looking into the mundane, a series of personal and not 'literary profound' letters between 'ordinary people' of the day, knowing what the buildings were like, the everyday concerns, the 'plebeian' sentiments of Mr. and Mrs (no Ms. back then) Johannes and Johanna Average.... what clothes they wore, and a raft of other small and mundane things which collectively 'get you in' to the pulse of an era.

No performing musician can afford to be without a fair chunk of having learned those aspects of a period, and any listener who ardently wants in, to understand or 'get it' really needs to look into 'all that' as well.


----------



## tdc

I find Brahms wears his heart on his sleeve a little more in the late piano pieces. They seem to me a little more free and intuitive somehow. The Intermezzos are mostly great and don't seem to me at all "contrived'" (maybe MR needs a different recording of these?) For me these pieces were kind of the gateway to starting to appreciate Brahms a lot more.


----------



## Sonata

Check out the violin sonatas, they're beautiful and I think they'd have the emotional impact you're looking for.


----------



## PetrB

karajan said:


> 1.) I know this may sound stupid but might I ask what is the distinction between a classical and romantic composition. From what i have heard, romantic compositions are showy and sometimes unnecessarily complex.
> 
> 2.) Yes, you are correct. I am 14 and have quite a big compilation of music for over a year but have started really listening attentively since the past 3 months. I am told that at my age it is difficult to really understand and appreciate the beauty of slower movements. Is it because of lack of patience which i naturally inherit or am i just a spoilt brat XD.
> 
> 3.) In the end, i suppose the only solution is concentrated and multiple listening until i finally start feeling the emotions and appreciate his works. Correct??


1.) Classical, to be brief, generally adheres to these aesthetics: Restraint (no huge overt displays of emotion, or flashes of technique for the 'drama' or for its own sake. Symmetry, form -- i.e, formalism, both of overall form and within any one movement, and 'balance.'

Romanticism is about expanding all of that, a more overt attempt to directly display or manipulate the emotion of the listener, is still concerned with form(s) but very much about expanding them. You may have noticed already more rhythmic ambiguity, deliberately obscuring the pulse, the barlines, etc. [Irony is, Brahms was a conservative and a classicist, though by harmonic procedure, etc. a 'romantic.' He was also one hell of a fine contrapuntist, further clouding, for some listeners, exactly what part of the music they are meant to concentrate upon. So Brahms is very much about form, formalism, still a goodly degree of restraint, and can be as 'remote' to some listeners as, say, Haydn or Mozart.

2.) The only thing 'inherent' about impatience at fourteen is the natural impatience of being fourteen, starting with wishing you were already 23, for example  It is damned difficult to sit still at fourteen, let alone with some slow movement taking its time. There are a range of emotions you are just now somewhat familiar with that will later 'happen again,' but when they do happen later and again you will come to realize there is more depth to them that time than you could possibly have imagined. (No, I do not know you, and I speak in generalities -- and I can remember, from long ago, myself and my peers at that age.)

The impatience too, has you 'wanting to get it all at once',' and that just ain't gonna happen, sir, not on the 'schedule' you feel, or have actually wished for.

No one but you and those directly around you knows if you are a spoilt brat.... so far, nothing in your verbal deportment has hinted at anything near that.

3.) You are 100% correct. Time, and time again, and giving things a time to rest in between listens before you sit down and listen to it again.

Really, think, right now, 14 is one-fourteenth of your whole life. As a fraction on a pie chart that is a much larger chunk than 33 as one thirty-third of your life. A 'whole year' sounds like much more to you than it does to even a 23 year-old. (Maybe you have already noticed, for examples, that summers no longer seem 'endless?')

So, yes, time. Yes, repeated listening, not with a vigor of again and again, back to back, but over time.

Thanks for speaking up with candor, and said with as much candor I think you're doing just fine, actually.


----------



## millionrainbows

Ravndal said:


> This is not the first Brahms thread. Been several other thread where people have actually said that Brahms was a crappy melodist, and the piano music is bad.
> 
> Which i will never forget.


That sounds rather ominous! 

I hear all the time about "Brahms - is a classicist" and "Brahms - is a Romantic," so don't get caught in that trap.

Pro-Brahmsians frequently use that as bait to diffuse criticism of Brahms, as if he were a "master" beyond reproach.


----------



## Ukko

millionrainbows said:


> That sounds rather ominous!
> 
> I hear all the time about "Brahms - is a classicist" and "Brahms - is a Romantic," so don't get caught in that trap.
> 
> Pro-Brahmsians frequently use that as bait to diffuse criticism of Brahms, as if he were a "master" beyond reproach.


Hah. _million_, I am getting the impression that you feel left out, that you know you are missing something and are 'striking out' in frustration. Relax, guy; it's only Brahms. There are a multitude of other composers you may not fail to appreciate.


----------



## millionrainbows

Hilltroll72 said:


> Hah. _million_, I am getting the impression that you feel left out, that you know you are missing something and are 'striking out' in frustration. Relax, guy; it's only Brahms. There are a multitude of other composers you may not fail to appreciate.


Why me, Lord? Uhh, what was the name of this thread? *I find Brahms lacks emotions in his works. Is this just me? 
*
Apparently from this, there is no universal agreement on Brahms, but I do "get" him when it is played properly.

That means, "with restraint when he's too Romantic," and when he's "too detached," I don't know if there's a remedy for that.

When he's "too bombastic," I want to go in and re-orchestrate that "burst" he always does.

What is that, tympani and horns? It's horrible, and he uses it over and over. Don't get me started...


----------



## PetrB

moody said:


> OK,OK, what about indecent emoticons ??


Sorry, indecent emoticons are not available for use on TC.

_Have a nice day!,_ ...unless you have made other arrangements, that is.


----------



## PetrB

millionrainbows said:


> That sounds rather ominous!
> 
> I hear all the time about "Brahms - is a classicist" and "Brahms - is a Romantic," so don't get caught in that trap.
> 
> Pro-Brahmsians frequently use that as bait to diffuse criticism of Brahms, as if he were a "master" beyond reproach.


My lord, find a trap and cry 'bait' when all that is is a very reasonable way to explain the door to Brahms is not colored Tchaikovskian Flaming Romantic Red,...that is if you're interested in actually finding it and getting in instead of maintaining the glam posture of an outsider somewhat excluded / abused by 'the music establishment.'


----------



## Sonata

millionrainbows said:


> That sounds rather ominous!
> 
> I hear all the time about "Brahms - is a classicist" and "Brahms - is a Romantic," so don't get caught in that trap.
> 
> Pro-Brahmsians frequently use that as bait to diffuse criticism of Brahms, *as if he were a "master" beyond reproach*.


Not beyond reproach, as our tomato-slinging forum has proven time and again :lol: but a master indeed!


----------



## Ukko

Sonata said:


> Not beyond reproach, as our tomato-slinging forum has proven time and again :lol: but a master indeed!


Indeed. Perhaps as much a master of "Brahmsian" as was Reger.


----------



## moody

millionrainbows said:


> Why me, Lord? Uhh, what was the name of this thread? *I find Brahms lacks emotions in his works. Is this just me?
> *
> Apparently from this, there is no universal agreement on Brahms, but I do "get" him when it is played properly.
> 
> That means, "with restraint when he's too Romantic," and when he's "too detached," I don't know if there's a remedy for that.
> 
> When he's "too bombastic," I want to go in and re-orchestrate that "burst" he always does.
> 
> What is that, tympani and horns? It's horrible, and he uses it over and over. Don't get me started...


Seems like you are started.


----------



## millionrainbows

PetrB said:


> My lord, find a trap and cry 'bait' when all that is is a very reasonable way to explain the door to Brahms is not colored Tchaikovskian Flaming Romantic Red,...that is if you're interested in actually finding it and getting in instead of maintaining the glam posture of an outsider somewhat excluded / abused by 'the music establishment.'


You mean an outsider like Brahms was by the new progressive German movement?



Sonata said:


> Not beyond reproach, as our tomato-slinging forum has proven time and again but a master indeed!


Well, Wagner gets more of that on this forum than Brahms ever did; it's refreshing, isn't it?



Hilltroll72 said:


> Indeed. Perhaps as much a master of "Brahmsian" as was Reger.


Hey! I happen to like Reger!



moody said:


> Seems like you are started.


Yes, I is...just like that Rolling Stones song...:lol:

But seriously, no baiting intended. This is a sincere expression of my thoughts. The more I look into Brahms, the more questionable he seems. I mean, why NOT do a "background check" on these composers? Everybody else does it to us.

Brahms, in my opinion, wrote some good, if conservative music; but beyond that, he resisted the natural development of tonality into chromatic, Late-Romantic tonality. 
How on Earth could Schoenberg have ever called him "Brahms The Progressive?" Brahms would have pulled that pistol away from his own head and pointed it directly at Schoenberg if he had the chance.


----------



## Guest

PetrB said:


> 1.) Classical, to be brief, generally adheres to these aesthetics: Restraint (no huge overt displays of emotion, or flashes of technique for the 'drama' or for its own sake. Symmetry, form -- i.e, formalism, both of overall form and within any one movement, and 'balance.'
> 
> Romanticism is about expanding all of that, a more overt attempt to directly display or manipulate the emotion of the listener, is still concerned with form(s) but very much about expanding them. You may have noticed already more rhythmic ambiguity, deliberately obscuring the pulse, the barlines, etc. [Irony is, Brahms was a conservative and a classicist, though by harmonic procedure, etc. a 'romantic.' He was also one hell of a fine contrapuntist, further clouding, for some listeners, exactly what part of the music they are meant to concentrate upon. So Brahms is very much about form, formalism, still a goodly degree of restraint, and can be as 'remote' to some listeners as, say, Haydn or Mozart.
> 
> 2.) The only thing 'inherent' about impatience at fourteen is the natural impatience of being fourteen, starting with wishing you were already 23, for example  It is damned difficult to sit still at fourteen, let alone with some slow movement taking its time. There are a range of emotions you are just now somewhat familiar with that will later 'happen again,' but when they do happen later and again you will come to realize there is more depth to them that time than you could possibly have imagined. (No, I do not know you, and I speak in generalities -- and I can remember, from long ago, myself and my peers at that age.)
> 
> The impatience too, has you 'wanting to get it all at once',' and that just ain't gonna happen, sir, not on the 'schedule' you feel, or have actually wished for.
> 
> No one but you and those directly around you knows if you are a spoilt brat.... so far, nothing in your verbal deportment has hinted at anything near that.
> 
> 3.) You are 100% correct. Time, and time again, and giving things a time to rest in between listens before you sit down and listen to it again.
> 
> Really, think, right now, 14 is one-fourteenth of your whole life. As a fraction on a pie chart that is a much larger chunk than 33 as one thirty-third of your life. A 'whole year' sounds like much more to you than it does to even a 23 year-old. (Maybe you have already noticed, for examples, that summers no longer seem 'endless?')
> 
> So, yes, time. Yes, repeated listening, not with a vigor of again and again, back to back, but over time.
> 
> Thanks for speaking up with candor, and said with as much candor I think you're doing just fine, actually.


Your very much welcome! :-D

Also, i have attentively listened to Horowitz in Moscow and damn the Scarlatti was plain awful. I didn't like it although i have found myself in love with Mahler's third. Even with attentive listening to some pieces i havent found myself to love them. Does that mean i should quit on those pieces?


----------



## StevenOBrien

Happy 180th birthday Brahms! Sorry that we're arguing on your special day!


----------



## KenOC

millionrainbows said:


> ...but beyond that, he resisted the natural development of tonality into chromatic, Late-Romantic tonality.


Poor Brahms...fighting the historical imperative! A regular King Canute, he was...


----------



## Guest

Whatever. Playing it (as a 'cellist, whatever the desk) is fun. Actually quite easy compared to some Beethoven symphonies. That of course is 'by the way'.


----------



## Neo Romanza

Whether Brahms has emotions in his music or not is purely subjective to the listener as we don't know what he meant or tried to express in his music unless he directly laid out his feelings measure by measure. All the musicians can do is interpret the music based on their own inclinations and intuition.


----------



## millionrainbows

KenOC said:


> Poor Brahms...fighting the historical imperative! A regular King Canute, he was...


And a good swimmer, I might add.

I take solace in the fact that I did not start this thread...


----------



## millionrainbows

Neo Romanza said:


> Whether Brahms has emotions in his music or not is purely subjective to the listener as we don't know what he meant or tried to express in his music unless he directly laid out his feelings measure by measure. All the musicians can do is interpret the music based on their own inclinations and intuition.


Well, art is a form of communication by the composer to the listener, and there is this thing called empathy: the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. So, we can infer from listening to the music whether the composer intends to convey sympathetic emotion...I can't prove it, though. :lol:


----------



## Neo Romanza

millionrainbows said:


> Well, art is a form of communication by the composer to the listener, and there is this thing called empathy: the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. So, we can infer from listening to the music whether the composer intends to convey sympathetic emotion...I can't prove it, though. :lol:


Personally, I hear a lot of emotion in Brahms as well as a lot genuine warmth, but those are just my own emotions getting caught up with me.


----------



## PetrB

KenOC said:


> Poor Brahms...fighting the historical imperative! A regular King Canute, he was...


I'm certain Brahms deliberately wrote the way he did just to irritate and disappoint M.R. some hundred plus years in the future re: his desire that all artists should be constantly pushing the envelope -- Brahms had a mystical foresight as to M.R's birth and life, you know, and anticipating his future existence, 'singled him out,' just because Brahm's felt like messing with him.

All part of a cosmic conspiracy, of course.


----------



## PetrB

millionrainbows said:


> Well, art is a form of communication by the composer to the listener, and there is this thing called empathy: the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. So, we can infer from listening to the music whether the composer intends to convey sympathetic emotion...I can't prove it, though. :lol:


So, you have no empathy for Brahm's emotional 'world' then....


----------



## Andreas

I have to say, the first time I listened to the late string quintet in g major op. 111, I was quite surprised at the first theme, which struck me as quite unbrahmsian in its rousing, emphatic, almost euphoric character.


----------



## millionrainbows

PetrB said:


> I'm certain Brahms deliberately wrote the way he did just to irritate and disappoint M.R. some hundred plus years in the future re: his desire that all artists should be constantly pushing the envelope -- Brahms had a mystical foresight as to M.R's birth and life, you know, and anticipating his future existence, 'singled him out,' just because Brahm's felt like messing with him.


I like Brahms' objectivity and logic; his motivic variation technique gives a unity and order to his ideas. This is a melodic/counterpoint factor, though. His music is interesting in its horizontal aspect, the way he handles root movement; but vertically, harmonically, I find him lacking, especially in light of what his contemporaries were doing; and music just has to be harmonically interesting for me to sustain an interest. I find Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven more interesting in this regard, and this was years before. Rhythmically, Brahms did some interesting things with compound time signatures, but this seems to be cloaked in conservatism.



PetrB said:


> All part of a cosmic conspiracy, of course.


I notice that certain members here are happy to interact on their terms when it suits them, while at the same time they seem to be nursing some secret grudge, which manifests as negative innuendo and irrelevant, oblique ad hominems. These are the things I weigh when assessing whether or not the interaction is worth it.


----------



## millionrainbows

PetrB said:


> So, you have no empathy for Brahm's emotional 'world' then....


Well, I think I might relate better to Brahms on a more honest level; I think he must have "shut down" emotionally after his libido was crushed. 
I detect a certain dramatic affectation in his work, not helped by the performance practices which are common; too much vibrato and too much rubato. 
Brahms was opposing the Romantic Wagner/Liszt aesthetic, so why not treat him as a classicist? 
That's what he wanted anyway. 
Maybe if Schoenberg had re-orchestrated the symphonies, I'd be able to enjoy them more.

Now, tell us about _your_ response to Brahms, PetrB, unless you find his music boring, and my observations more compelling. :lol:


----------



## astronautnic

millionrainbows said:


> I like Brahms' objectivity and logic; his motivic variation technique gives a unity and order to his ideas. This is a melodic/counterpoint factor, though. His music is interesting in its horizontal aspect, the way he handles root movement; but vertically, harmonically, I find him lacking, especially in light of what his contemporaries were doing; and music just has to be harmonically interesting for me to sustain an interest. I find Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven more interesting in this regard, and this was years before. Rhythmically, Brahms did some interesting things with compound time signatures, but this seems to be cloaked in conservatism.
> 
> I notice that certain members here are happy to interact on their terms when it suits them, while at the same time they seem to be nursing some secret grudge, which manifests as negative innuendo and irrelevant, oblique ad hominems. These are the things I weigh when assessing whether or not the interaction is worth it.


Haven't noticed that at all, I really find it difficult to believe , especially as all are devoted to a modicum of objectivity here!


----------



## astronautnic

millionrainbows said:


> Well, I think I might relate better to Brahms on a more honest level; I think he must have "shut down" emotionally after his libido was crushed.
> I detect a certain dramatic affectation in his work, not helped by the performance practices which are common; too much vibrato and too much rubato.
> Brahms was opposing the Romantic Wagner/Liszt aesthetic, so why not treat him as a classicist?
> That's what he wanted anyway.
> Maybe if Schoenberg had re-orchestrated the symphonies, I'd be able to enjoy them more.
> 
> Now, tell us about _your_ response to Brahms, PetrB, unless you find his music boring, and my observations more compelling. :lol:


True, that sexually obsessed pervert Brahms should have been honestly castrated in order to prevent him from this unbearable crying dishonest, affected and overboarding emotions. Thank god for progressive gods like Wagner and Tschaikowsky who didn't show off with "exaggerated potency"........


----------



## millionrainbows

> I notice that certain members here are happy to interact on their terms when it suits them, while at the same time they seem to be nursing some secret grudge, which manifests as negative innuendo and irrelevant, oblique ad hominems.





astronautnic said:


> Haven't noticed that at all, I really find it difficult to believe , especially as all are devoted to a modicum of objectivity here!


I don't think that the above observation about such behaviors, or their consequences, turned out to be true. Perhaps you are a believer now. Have a nice day.


----------



## aleazk

Brahms is more cerebral in comparison to other composers of the era. But he has very powerful and emotional moments:






One of my favorite pieces by him.


----------



## millionrainbows

aleazk said:


> Brahms is more cerebral in comparison to other composers of the era. But he has very powerful and emotional moments: (Rhapsody No. 2 in G minor, Op.79) One of my favorite pieces by him.


I will admit, in the hands of Martha Argerich, Brahms' cerebral nature gets a good kick in the wazoo, just what the doctor ordered. I have this CD, so I got it out to hear it in higher-rez. You will also notice on this CD that Argerich includes Liszt and Chopin pieces, so in this case, Brahms fits right in with the Romantic aesthetic of his declared "enemies."

Yes, I agree that Brahms was at his best in chamber works; and nobody has made much mention of his songs, which looks like a good way to penetrate Brahms' emotional dimension.


----------



## millionrainbows

astronautnic said:


> True, that sexually obsessed pervert Brahms should have been honestly castrated in order to prevent him from this unbearable crying dishonest, affected and overboarding emotions. Thank god for progressive gods like Wagner and Tschaikowsky who didn't show off with "exaggerated potency"........


No, castration is much too drastic; even I have a modicum of compassion for him. Perhaps a glass of wine, a good erotic spanking, then followed by some 'theraputic activity.'


----------



## Andreas

millionrainbows said:


> I detect a certain dramatic affectation in his work, not helped by the performance practices which are common; too much vibrato and too much rubato.
> Brahms was opposing the Romantic Wagner/Liszt aesthetic, so why not treat him as a classicist?


I recommend Roger Norrington's recordings of the symphonies.


----------



## clavichorder

Brahms has manly emotions, you just have to be able to handle them. LOL.


----------



## clavichorder

Seriously, it seems to require testosterone to appreciate works like this: 




And I personally like these ballades better than Chopin's...


----------



## Ukko

clavichorder said:


> Seriously, it seems to require testosterone to appreciate works like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I personally like these ballades better than Chopin's...


Ballades are about something. Brahms' ballades and Chopin's are about different sorts of things (Chopin's 'things' are pretty dramatic, eh?). Gilel's interpretation here makes me wonder if Brahms had a certain piece from Schumann's woods in mind.


----------



## astronautnic

millionrainbows said:


> No, castration is much too drastic; even I have a modicum of compassion for him. Perhaps a glass of wine, a good erotic spanking, then followed by some 'theraputic activity.'


Isn't it fascinating and evident that the libido defines , as undoubtedly scientifically proven on these pages, the musical quality of the composer? Wagner, aware of his impotency. unleashing the wanna-be Dom of his self-sacrificing servants, thus turning into a parody of himself, producing self-satisfied (he couldn't even **********) shallow and superficial pomp. And what about poor Schönberg who had forsaken tonality and key signatures? He had committed adultery against the art of music. His wife having realised he was "sexually atonal" had no other choice than to betray the poor impotent sod with others. The worst of all was, as we now know, Brahms, together with that look-alike Lou Harrison, of course. Imagine Wagner or Schönberg would have long beards as well......


----------



## millionrainbows

astronautnic said:


> Isn't it fascinating and evident that the libido defines , as undoubtedly scientifically proven on these pages, the musical quality of the composer? Wagner, aware of his impotency. unleashing the wanna-be Dom of his self-sacrificing servants, thus turning into a parody of himself, producing self-satisfied (he couldn't even **********) shallow and superficial pomp. And what about poor Schönberg who had forsaken tonality and key signatures? He had committed adultery against the art of music. His wife having realised he was "sexually atonal" had no other choice than to betray the poor impotent sod with others. The worst of all was, as we now know, Brahms, of course. Imagine Wagner or Schönberg would have long beards as well......


I'm sure Sigmund Freud would agree. Maybe they were all gay.


----------



## Mahlerian

astronautnic said:


> And what about poor Schönberg who had forsaken tonality and key signatures? He had committed adultery against the art of music. His wife having realised he was "sexually atonal" had no other choice than to betray the poor impotent sod with others.


Well, you're getting your chronology a bit mixed up....


----------



## weinermr

I find great emotion listening Brahms. Or rather the emotion I'm expressing is my own, brought out by the music. Vivaldi leaves me cold, Mahler is my favorite at the other extreme.


----------



## Novelette

Listen to Brahms' Variations on a Theme by Schumann in F Sharp Minor, Op. 9. There is much emotion there, a great tender affection for Schumann.

Therein I find a most intimate and personal sentimentality in Brahms.


----------



## Ukko

Yesterday I listened to Eugene List play Brahms' first two sonatas. A pleasure to hear, they are. Opera 1 and 2... no wonder Schumann predicted great things.

View attachment 17740


----------



## millionrainbows

Hilltroll72 said:


> Yesterday I listened to Eugene List play Brahms' first two sonatas. A pleasure to hear, they are. Opera 1 and 2... no wonder Schumann predicted great things.
> 
> View attachment 17740


Is that a gerbil perched on Brahms' shoulder?


----------



## Ukko

millionrainbows said:


> Is that a gerbil perched on Brahms' shoulder?


No, that is an illusion, possibly initiated by your envy. Looks _and_ talent?


----------



## millionrainbows

Hilltroll72 said:


> No, that is an illusion, possibly initiated by your envy. Looks _and_ talent?


You know, there are disturbing anecdotes floating around, involving gerbils...this might be a significant historical precedent.


----------



## Ukko

millionrainbows said:


> You know, there are disturbing anecdotes floating around, involving gerbils...this might be a significant historical precedent.


Hmm... is this why you see gerbils everywhere?


----------



## millionrainbows

Brahms, cat-killer, smuggler, user of gerbils, last seen with a crossbow. Use extreme caution...


----------



## Guest

This thread is going in an undesirable direction...


----------



## millionrainbows

Well, we're all here because we love Brahms, correct?


----------



## spradlig

Maybe it's a matter of taste but I find Brahms's music profoundly emotional, for example (choosing from your counterexamples) the Double Concerto (esp. first movement), and Symphonies #1 and #4 (esp. the first movements of each). Also the Tragic Overture and many of his solo piano works, such as his Rhapsody in G minor (don't know opus number) and many intermezzi (including a famous set of three). There is a profoundly melancholy flavor. 

I like some Chopin compositions but I don't find him as "profound" as Brahms. His piano music is cluttered with lots of grace notes, trills, runs, etc. that do little to hide the lack of substance in the melodies.

This is just my opinion/personal taste.


----------



## Beethoven10

poss the most emotive Brahms I know is the Schoenberg arrangement of his 1st Piano Quartet. slow movement just lush!


----------



## astronautnic

Beethoven10 said:


> poss the most emotive Brahms I know is the Schoenberg arrangement of his 1st Piano Quartet. slow movement just lush!


Well, I find the "original" Klavierquartett Nr 1 g-moll op.25 much more emotional than the whole Schönberg arrangement, but then again, i find his music almost generally "most emotive". As spradlig wrote, probably just "matter of (emotional) taste"....


----------



## Andrei

Interesting question. I consider that is is _not_ you, rather it is the music of Brahms that is less emotional compared to other Romantics. What I would say, however, is that this is not a bad thing. In fact Stravinsky would approve given of his distaste of of those who sought their emotions to be titivated by music. Brahms was an intellectual and when I am up to the challenge I put on a major work of his. There is nonetheless emotion in his music, just not to the extent of others. For example: the second half of the Alto Rhapsody - there you will find love. The second movement of the Requiem - what emotion I don't know but it is overwhelming! The waltz no. 15 (in Ab I think) for piano - you will experience tenderness.


----------



## KenOC

Interesting... I find Brahms, especially the chamber music, to be quite emotional. In fact, a bit oppressive sometimes compared with the more "classical" composers, and even Schumann.


----------



## violadude

I THINK YOU LACK EMOTION!!!!!!

Just kidding. 

Erm, try listening to is music expecting a more moody kind of emotion rather than huge climatic and colorful sort of emotion a la Tchaikovsky.


----------



## peeyaj

Britten hated Brahms music:

_He developed a particular animosity towards Brahms, whose piano music he had once held in great esteem; in 1952 he confided that he played through all Brahms's music from time to time, "*to see if I am right about him; I usually find that I underestimated last time how bad it was!*"_


----------



## Ravndal

Jesus christ, can you stop with that? Brahms is one of the most genius composers that has ever lived, and if you don't like him - ok - but seriously, stop with the unsourced quotes. I'm sure i can find just the same, and just as many about Schubert.


----------



## peeyaj

Ravndal said:


> Jesus christ, can you stop with that? Brahms is one of the most genius composers that has ever lived, and if you don't like him - ok - but seriously, stop with the unsourced quotes. I'm sure i can find just the same, and just as many about Schubert.


I like Brahms too! I'm just quoting that Britten quote because I have read that (only) today, while researching in Wikipedia.


----------



## moody

violadude said:


> I THINK YOU LACK EMOTION!!!!!!
> 
> Just kidding.
> 
> Erm, try listening to is music expecting a more moody kind of emotion rather than huge climatic and colorful sort of emotion a la Tchaikovsky.


I didn't know that you knew all about my emotions.I must be an open book !


----------



## moody

peeyaj said:


> Britten hated Brahms music:
> 
> _He developed a particular animosity towards Brahms, whose piano music he had once held in great esteem; in 1952 he confided that he played through all Brahms's music from time to time, "*to see if I am right about him; I usually find that I underestimated last time how bad it was!*"_


I most certainly prefer Brahms to Britten and don't need to play through all their music to verify that.


----------



## Itullian

Brahms and Schumann symphonies along with Schuberts Great are my favorite symphonies.
And Brahms music moves me very much.


----------



## realdealblues

moody said:


> I most certainly prefer Brahms to Britten and don't need to play through all their music to verify that.


Ditto.

For myself, Brahms is great with no lack of emotional depth.


----------



## Cheyenne

Andrei said:


> Brahms was an intellectual and when I am up to the challenge I put on a major work of his.


Does anyone else find Brahms 'challenging'? I've never heard something like that before.


----------



## neoshredder

Not sure about lacking emotion. I just find it hard to get into for whatever reason. I much prefer Tchaikovsky.


----------



## Ukko

Cheyenne said:


> Does anyone else find Brahms 'challenging'? I've never heard something like that before.


That isn't what _Andrei _wrote. If you like to dig in and pick apart a composition, a major work by Brahms may be challenging. (That's not a challenge I would accept though. Kick back and listen, maybe an occasional subvocal ooh or say-what, that's about it.)


----------



## Cheyenne

Hilltroll72 said:


> That isn't what _Andrei _wrote. If you like to dig in and pick apart a composition, a major work by Brahms may be challenging. (That's not a challenge I would accept though. Kick back and listen, maybe an occasional subvocal ooh or say-what, that's about it.)


Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't being accusatory or anything, merely curious.


----------



## JCarmel

I think Brahms music is emotional but not transcendent in it's emotional power. 
I read quite a bit about the composer a long time ago & I was left then with the impression that he never expressed his feelings at that deepest level. He had various passionate friendships with women that moved him sufficiently that we find echoes reverberating in his music at the time but perhaps only with Clara Schumann, did he experience the deeper love that unfortunately wasn't able to be properly and fully expressed.....
(as you do?!!)


----------



## astronautnic

There is a certain shyness, a calmer melancholy, a self-doubt, something subtle about Brahms. His music is initially not always accessible, however, once one has dived into his world , I can continously return to the works, never tiring and always detecting something new . When, on the other hand, I hear Tchaikovsky, the emotional flash in the pan burns down relatively quickly and I soon have enough of it (which is why I do not hear it very often)
Even though all the challenging compositional details /( "developing variation", "centrifugal harmony", "musical prose" undoubtedly contribute to my fascination, I'm taken aback when he is trying to hide certain emotions, but fails in the most wonderful and fulfilling artistic way behind musical rigor, even occasional abruptness . An example: the "tranquillo" at the end of the first movement of the Clarinet Sonata in E flat major, Op 120/2 seems like a dance, but just like as if someone wants to dance knowing that it is eventually denied. Technically - alright, I mention it again, but only to show how little importance it bears , this is a "cancer" or "reverse cancer" of a motive from the first theme, but even with this strict structure Brahms could not hide the tenderness and vulnerability of this moment. The rigor prevents any hint of sentimentality, but behind it a very sensitive, vulnerable and tender expression is revealed. A similar example would be the middle part of the Intermezzo Op 119 No 2, outwardly considered it is nothing more than a major variation of the A section , but the expression is rather a desire of a "Viennese" dance than a dance itself.


----------



## astronautnic

peeyaj said:


> I like Brahms too! I'm just quoting that Britten quote because I have read that (only) today, while researching in Wikipedia.


I like "hypocritical jokes" too.....:angel:


----------



## neoshredder

astronautnic said:


> There is a certain shyness, a calmer melancholy, a self-doubt, something subtle about Brahms. His music is initially not always accessible, however, once one has dived into his world , I can continously return to the works, never tiring and always detecting something new . When, on the other hand, I hear Tchaikovsky, the emotional flash in the pan burns down relatively quickly and I soon have enough of it (which is why I do not hear it very often)
> Even though all the challenging compositional details /( "developing variation", "centrifugal harmony", "musical prose" undoubtedly contribute to my fascination, I'm taken aback when he is trying to hide certain emotions, but fails in the most wonderful and fulfilling artistic way behind musical rigor, even occasional abruptness . An example: the "tranquillo" at the end of the first movement of the Clarinet Sonata in E flat major, Op 120/2 seems like a dance, but just like as if someone wants to dance knowing that it is eventually denied. Technically - alright, I mention it again, but only to show how little importance it bears , this is a "cancer" or "reverse cancer" of a motive from the first theme, but even with this strict structure Brahms could not hide the tenderness and vulnerability of this moment. The rigor prevents any hint of sentimentality, but behind it a very sensitive, vulnerable and tender expression is revealed. A similar example would be the middle part of the Intermezzo Op 119 No 2, outwardly considered it is nothing more than a major variation of the A section , but the expression is rather a desire of a "Viennese" dance than a dance itself.


I guess we could say that Brahms and Tchaikovsky are on the opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to Romanticism. A very different experience. I prefer the flashy melodies of Tchaikovsky over the subtle melodies of Brahms in this case.


----------



## Vesteralen

JCarmel said:


> I think Brahms music is emotional but not transcendent in its emotional power.


That's odd. As far as I'm concerned, no other composer I can think of comes as close to "transcendent in...emotional power" than Brahms does.

If I had to list the 10 pieces of music that most stirred me emotionally, producing the greatest number of chills and moving me to tears, seven of them would be from Brahms'

"Denn alles fleisch es ist wie gras" from A German Requiem
The climactic moments from the first and second movements of the first Piano Concerto
The entry of the chorus in the Alto Rhapsody
The third movement of Symphony No 3
The closing moments of the first and fourth movements of the 4th Symphony

These are seven of the most emotionally powerful moments in all of music as far as I'm concerned.

It's odd how some things resonate so deeply for some and not for others.

Ah well.....


----------



## Itullian

Brahms moves me MUCH more than Tchaikovskys heart on sleeve, sometimes eye rolling music.


----------



## neoshredder

Vesteralen said:


> It's odd how some things resonate so deeply for some and not for others.
> 
> Ah well.....


Basically this. I guess I'm used to being quite different to others in musical taste. I doubt many others here like 80's Rock. I just have different priorities in what I'm looking for in music.


----------



## niv

Vesteralen said:


> It's odd how some things resonate so deeply for some and not for others.


I don't think it's odd. People don't seem to realize that the listener, the audience, plays a great role in the enjoyment in any piece of art. So when they don't like something, rarely they attach that dislike to a quality of themselves... it's more pleasing to the ego to simply disparage the work


----------



## Vesteralen

neoshredder said:


> Basically this. I guess I'm used to being quite different to others in musical taste. I doubt many others here like 80's Rock. I just have different priorities in what I'm looking for in music.


Well, I'm all for that. I don't mind having personal tastes that differ from the norm in a lot of areas, either.

But, this is more than just a matter of "taste". This is a case of one person feeling nothing emotionally transcendent and another person feeling the greatest experience of emotional transcendence. As much as we all know this happens, it's still something we might now and then have a hard time accepting.

But, still...I'm not going to lose any sleep over it


----------



## Vesteralen

niv said:


> I don't think it's odd. People don't seem to realize that the listener, the audience, plays a great role in the enjoyment in any piece of art. So when they don't like something, rarely they attach that dislike to a quality of themselves... it's more pleasing to the ego to simply disparage the work


This is why I have such a hard time with the word "great" used in the context of music.

An old friend of mine once told me that he had a professor who made the claim - "There are twelve great moments in music. Six of them can be found in the music of Bach, and the other six in Brahms."

??????? (I was always curious about what those moments were, exactly. He never said, apparently.)

But, basically, what he must have really meant was "There are twelve moments in music that resonate with me greatly"


----------



## Andrei

astronautnic said:


> There is a certain shyness, a calmer melancholy, a self-doubt, something subtle about Brahms. His music is initially not always accessible, however, once one has dived into his world , I can continously return to the works, never tiring and always detecting something new . When, on the other hand, I hear Tchaikovsky, the emotional flash in the pan burns down relatively quickly and I soon have enough of it (which is why I do not hear it very often)


Astute comment, if I may say so, but allow me to point to at least one exception to that generalization. In particular: Tchaikovsky's 6th symphony. However to keep this a Brahms thread and I like some of those adjectives you have used ... 'calm' , 'subtle'. Relative terms to be sure, but I do agree.


----------



## Cheyenne

I like his early, sentimental chamber music. The pieces can be so tranquilly romantic. 
(I like all of his chamber music, actually.)


----------



## Tristan

I used to feel this way until I started listening more to his chamber music and solo piano music. I have a much deeper appreciation for Brahms than I used to.


----------



## weinermr

JCarmel said:


> I think Brahms music is emotional but not transcendent in it's emotional power.
> I read quite a bit about the composer a long time ago & I was left then with the impression that he never expressed his feelings at that deepest level. He had various passionate friendships with women that moved him sufficiently that we find echoes reverberating in his music at the time but perhaps only with Clara Schumann, did he experience the deeper love that unfortunately wasn't able to be properly and fully expressed.....
> (as you do?!!)


I feel many transcendent emotions in Brahms' music. The "big tune" in the last movement of the 1st Symphony brings me to tears, every time I hear it. The 3rd Symphony is gorgeous and moving. For different emotions, listen to the Clarinet Sonatas and the Clarinet Quintet. There are so many more examples. Some of his chord progressions lead me to emotions I can't even describe.


----------



## Celloman

Yes, Brahms lacks emotion. And the sky is green.


----------



## JCarmel

Perhaps those reactions say as much about you as it does Brahms music, weinermr. 
I used to feel like that about that movement of the 1st symphony...I still do of course but _not_ to the degree that I used-to, so there has obviously been some change in me, that fails to react as strongly to the emotion-inducing triggers in that particular piece of music.


----------



## mstar

I actually find some of the Baroque Era to be quite emotionless, as well as Mozart's piano sonatas. 
As for Brahms, I think that his structure and fluency does not override or exaggerate his emotion - rather, I feel that it does not really affect passion much.

Nevertheless, I find Brahms's works passionate and beautiful, as well as emotional - it is just that Brahms is not _saccharine_.  (Nor is he Rachmaninov! Or Tchaikovsky for that matter.  (Sorry, I couldn't help it!) )


----------



## Piwikiwi

mstar said:


> I actually find some of the Baroque Era to be quite emotionless, as well as Mozart's piano sonatas.


I you take the romantic era as a standard of how emotional pieces should be then it might be. I just think that nobody is doing themselves a favour if you listen to brahms and expect chopin like the OP.


----------



## Cheyenne

I'm not very fond of Chopin, Tchaikovsky or Rachmaninoff, so perhaps that explains why Brahms is the peak of emotional expression for me. Nevertheless, I think to find none in Brahms is a little excessive, even to those used to it being a little more exaggerated.


----------



## aleazk

Brahms' emotions are more intimately expressed, and have complex levels and dialogues, i.e., it's not "sad" or "happy". Instead, it's like an internal soliloquy about the different and conflicting aspects of life. One musical phrase says "oh, melancholy, I don't want to live like this", and the next gesture says "wait, it's not that bad, remember the fresh air in the forest, you like that", and so on.


----------



## neoshredder

Tchaikovsky is excitement. Brahms is dull. Just how I feel between the 2. I like music that shows excitement.


----------



## Itullian

The last movements of symphonies 1,2 and 4 dull?!
I think they're among the most exciting in all music.


----------



## TxllxT

Brahms' music can perhaps be compared to a well-designed _Volkswagen_: incredible meticulously attentive to detail, every superfluity has been cut out, but there is something impersonal present, something too fancy-free, that leaves me in the end unattached.


----------



## Vesteralen

TxllxT said:


> Brahms' music can perhaps be compared to a well-designed _Volkswagen_: incredible meticulously attentive to detail, every superfluity has been cut out, but there is something impersonal present, something too fancy-free, that leaves me in the end unattached.


Jetta? Passat? Tiguan? Touareg? Golf? GTI? Beetle? Eos?


----------



## TxllxT

Vesteralen said:


> Jetta? Passat? Tiguan? Touareg? Golf? GTI? Beetle? Eos?


Actually I was thinking of such a discrete design like the _Volkswagen Bora_


----------



## astronautnic

neoshredder said:


> Tchaikovsky is excitement. Brahms is dull. Just how I feel between the 2. I like music that shows excitement.


Just a very personal thing indeed , depends if excitement is produced by sugary superficiality or emotional depth..... for example. Any allusion to the above mentioned composers is purely coincidental, of course.


----------



## neoshredder

astronautnic said:


> Just a very personal thing indeed , depends if excitement is produced by sugary superficiality or emotional depth..... for example. Any allusion to the above mentioned composers is purely coincidental, of course.


Not enough sugar in my Brahms cereal. Think I'll switch brands.


----------



## rrudolph

I find that 151-proof rum lacks alcohol. Is this just me?


----------



## astronautnic

neoshredder said:


> Not enough sugar in my Brahms cereal. Think I'll switch brands.


Stunning confession of a müsli eater:lol:


----------



## weinermr

neoshredder said:


> Tchaikovsky is excitement. Brahms is dull. Just how I feel between the 2. I like music that shows excitement.


Brahms is dull to you. Brahms is anything but dull to me, and definitely exciting, and to many others too.


----------



## Wandering

I don't find his music lacking emotion. Though often it is the tender things I favor from Brahms. His music often seems positively charged, soothing and tender as opposed to bleak or stormy. As an example of this I'd say the 1st variation of Haydn is my favorite. Also his 3rd movement of Symph. 3. His 'famous waltz' and intermezzi and capriccio. His signature rich orchestration was somehow all over his later piano music. Plenty of storm also like the opening of 3rd and closing of 4th.


----------



## dgee

It seems some people find Brahms "unemotional" or "dry". This mystifies me. So much of Brahms just bursts forth with intensity I have to wonder what these people are listening to - even at its most tranquil there is this latent potential for it to reach great emotional heights, never static

Still, I could always do with more of this in recordings. Despite the music, some Brahms recordings are too restrained. It needs more heart-rending!

I have also manfully refrained from making disparaging comments about the sickly pastiche of other composers named in this thread ;-)


----------



## neoshredder

Well whatever Brahms lacks, it seems Tchaikovsky excels in. So I'm happy.


----------



## Garlic

Tchaikovsky lets it all out while Brahms tries to keep it together. With Tchaikovsky what you hear is what you get, but Brahms has layer upon layer.


----------



## Cheyenne

His chamber music personified would be the sort of person you simply want to hug. I generally dislike sentimentalism, but Brahms' is phenomenal. It started at opus. 8 and it never ended. His music is so lovely, so naively romantic, so singularly charming.


----------



## Guest

Comparing the emotion in Tchaikovsky vs. Brahms is like comparing the emotion in a Mexican Telenovela vs. a BBC drama. Both Brahms and the BBC drama can have emotion, but yes, compared to the overly emotional Tchaikovsky and Telenovela, they do seem dry. 

I think of it this way - Brahms is like the love between two people that has been cultivated for time and is comprised of both mutual attraction and mutual respect. Tchaikovsky is like a 12-year old girl staring starry-eyed at her poster of Justin Bieber, sure that she could never love anybody else as madly and deeply as him, and certain that he is the only boy she could ever love.

I like Tchaikovsky, but just because he is so over the top emotional does not preclude Brahms from also having emotion - just not so over the top.


----------



## Ravndal

Well put, DrMike! I agree completely, and I like Tchaikovsky as well.


----------

