# Thoughts on Mendelssohn



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

I have been wondering; is Mendelssohn a seriously underrated composers? I know he as regarded as one of the better ones of the early romantic ere but seriously I don't see much speculation about him or his music. I have read alot of posts here and I don't remember reading anything about him, alot of talk about Brahms, Tchaikovsky and many others. I have been listening to him for the last few days and I am so in love with his music; his mature Violin Concerto, Symphonies No. 3 and No. 4, Midsummers Night's Dream, Hebrides Overture, Piano Concerto No. 1, Songs without Word, Piano Sextet and other beautifully written chamber music. These works aren't just decent but pretty amazing, at least in my opinion. I have been watching "Whole Notes" about the great composers, they did alot of them but no Mendelssohn. I was just wondering any way.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Mendelssohn String Quartet in F Minor, opus 80; arguably the greatest instrumental work he ever composed. He wrote it while grieving over his dear sister Fanny's death.


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

Is that the one he write after his sister died?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

DrMuller said:


> Is that the one he write after his sister died?


Yes. I hope you get to hear it someday. He died soon after, in the same year his sister died, 1847. Very emotional, passionate music as one would expect, given the circumstances.


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Yes. I hope you get to hear it someday. He died soon after, in the same year his sister died.


I have heard it, it's wonderful.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

You seem to be on the right track. You found a composer whose music you enjoy, and you're exploring. Why bother about who else likes him or not?

Whatever opinion others render concerning Mendelssohn, if you enjoy the music, listen on. But, the man's reputation is sound.

I found your post curious for the reason that I myself appreciate Mendelssohn, have enjoyed all those pieces you mentioned (which are pretty much the standards for this composer), but don't actually play much of the man's music during my formal listening sessions. In fact, I can't recall a recent time when I featured a listen to a piece by Felix M. When last I did, I'm sure it was either the _Hebrides Overture _(which I've long cherished as the other piece, background music, from the "Lone Ranger" show) or the exquisite Piano Trio No. 1, my favorite piece by Mendelssohn. (And the piece I recommend you rush to hear, if you do not yet know it.)

I owe it to myself to program more Mendelssohn into my weekly music diet. With that in mind, I put on the Piano Trio prior to beginning to type this comment. Ah ... I'm enjoying that Trio once again.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

DrMuller said:


> I have heard it, it's wonderful.


Good! You know there's a fairly long thread on Mendelssohn in the composers guestbook section.


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Good! You know there's a fairly long thread on Mendelssohn in the composers guestbook section.


I hadn't seen it, oh well.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

DrMuller said:


> I hadn't seen it, oh well.


It began in 2008! Still going strong! All the Mendelssohn you will ever need!!


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

Let's not forget that he was responsible for bringing Bach's music back to life.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

DrMuller said:


> Let's not forget that he was responsible for bringing Bach's music back to life.


Yes. But I love his chamber music, his string quartets and those two wonderful piano trios. Of course his great violin concerto too and the slow movement of the Italian symphony.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Interesting to read that the violin concerto was one of his last major instrumental works...maybe the very last? He certainly didn't slow down!

Here's a big slug of Mendelssohn that can fill a lot of gaps and provide new listening, for $2.69. Other sets in this series have been good, and the reviews here are favorable.

http://www.amazon.com/Essential-Men...F8&qid=1407123108&sr=1-1&keywords=mendelssohn


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Mendelssohn will always be one of my favorite composers. Such beautiful, passionate music; forever young.


----------



## Fugue Meister (Jul 5, 2014)

DrMuller said:


> Let's not forget that he was responsible for bringing Bach's music back to life.


This may be the case but I think we give him too much credit for this.. I'd like to think Bach's music would have found his way into the repertoire no matter what... Mendelssohn was just wise enough to start plugging Bach's music first (and he made a plethora of edits which weren't all the best either) I just feel that if Mozart, Beethoven and Schubert all had some Bach scores around Bach wasn't just buried and completely dead to the world, true connoisseurs always knew they'd better have some on hand.

Moving on to the OP, I do quite enjoy Mendelssohn contrary to my slight rant above (that's just a pet peeve of mine the whole we know about Bach because of Mendelssohn thing..). I just discovered his string quartets a week ago and I've been listening all week. I do think he isn't more popular because he never did anything spectacularly different, he was just a master craftsman working within a form already perfected by Haydn and Mozart (and to be perfectly frank, as good as he is he never comes close to besting Haydn or Mozart).

This is why he'll always live in others shadows. But it's not necessarily a bad place to be and he does have a lot of music in the repertoire, I think he'd appreciate his place in history.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

With Mendelssohn, many seem to have two main issues --

1. He was a child prodigy -- but kind of remained so, i.e. his mature output did not fulfill the potential of his teenage masterworks.
2. He was a conservative (whatever this means).

From my experience, just listening through his ouevre --- in particular the things he was writing in the last decade of his life -- should be enough to refute the above issues.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

SONNET CLV said:


> ... the exquisite Piano Trio No. 1, my favorite piece by Mendelssohn. (And the piece I recommend you rush to hear, if you do not yet know it.)
> 
> I owe it to myself to program more Mendelssohn into my weekly music diet. With that in mind, I put on the Piano Trio prior to beginning to type this comment. Ah ... I'm enjoying that Trio once again.


I assume you're familiar with the 2nd trio as well, which for me, may be even better than the 1st.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Skilmarilion said:


> I assume you're familiar with the 2nd trio as well, which for me, may be even better than the 1st.


Yes. The second trio is more profound than the first.


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

Symphonies 3 and 4 are so good, so lyrical and beautiful. I have never heard his 5th though.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Don't hurry.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

DrMuller said:


> Symphonies 3 and 4 are so good, so lyrical and beautiful. I have never heard his 5th though.


The Fifth is actually an earlier work and not nearly as good as the more popular Third and Fourth.

I think the order of composition was as follows:
1, 5, 4, 3, 2.

The numbering is just the order that they were published in.


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> The Fifth is actually an earlier work and not nearly as good as the more popular Third and Fourth.
> 
> I think the order of composition was as follows:
> 1, 5, 4, 3, 2.
> ...


Ok, I didn't know that. So much to learn.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> The Fifth is actually an earlier work and not nearly as good as the more popular Third and Fourth.
> 
> I think the order of composition was as follows:
> 1, 5, 4, 3, 2.
> ...


The Fifth in a curious work for several reasons, but by no means a work to carelessly overlook, in my opinion. Being, one might say, a semi-sacred work celebrating the Reformation, it might give rise to potentially sectarian interpretations. Personally, I find it wonderfully and imaginatively structured and splendidly executed.

The Second, again a semi-sacred work, is another peculiar offering. If Brahms' First was nicknamed Beethovens's Tenth, then I'd like to call Mendelssohn's Second Mahler's Zeroth, weird as it may sound.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

It isn't fair to say his mature works didn't fulfill his potential. He completely changed his line of work and was more involved in administration of the music school he founded, rather than being a full time composer.

The Reformation Symphony is every bit as good as the others.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

The Reformation Symphony is also noteworthy for its repeated use of the Dresden Amen. If you're not forewarned about it, you suddenly look up at say, "Who put on _Parsifal_?"


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> The Fifth is actually an earlier work and not nearly as good as the more popular Third and Fourth.
> 
> I think the order of composition was as follows:
> 1, 5, 4, 3, 2.
> ...


Yep, I always found that quite irritating!

I think the 3rd (Scottish) is usually put after the 2nd, since he set it aside for around 10 years and didn't complete it until the early 1840's, making it his final completed symphony.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

I like the Violin Concerto and the Songs without Words that I've heard so far -- especially this one:






And, to be honest, I much prefer ELIJAH to most of the Baroque religious oratorios I've heard (with the exception of Handel's, maybe).


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Here is one of the best interpretations of the 5th I've heard. They managed to bring up the color without losing momentum.






In contrast, and after many tries, I still find Lobgesang to be quite dull. I quite like the Scotch though, particularly the first two movements. I think Mendelssohn's greatest achievements can be found in his chamber music, and pretty much everybody has recognized his piano works as important masterpieces.


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Here is one of the best interpretations of the 5th I've heard. They managed to bring up the color without losing momentum.
> 
> In contrast, and after many tries, I still find Lobgesang to be quite dull. I quite like the Scotch though, particularly the first two movements. I think Mendelssohn's greatest achievements can be found in his chamber music, and pretty much everybody has recognized his piano works as important masterpieces.


Yes the Scottish Symphony is great, the whole symphony is amazing. I personally think the scottish one is better than the Italian symphony.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

No mention yet of the marvelous *Cello Sonata in D major, Op. 58*! I'm in love with Mendelssohn's mature chamber music but that this piece seems to fly under the radar is extremely curious.


----------



## musicrom (Dec 29, 2013)

I like Mendelssohn's 2nd Symphony, specifically the 3 orchestral movements (for whatever reason, I just can't Handel choral parts). The main theme in the first movement always gets stuck in my head for a long time after listening to it though - not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.


----------



## jimsumner (Jul 7, 2013)

Can't "Handel choral parts?" Is that a pun? If so, it's a great one. If not, it should be.


----------



## Brad (Mar 27, 2014)

I feel like my boy Felix is kinda like Schubert. We only see their early and middle period works. Had they lived long enough, they could've gotten more innovative, emotionally complex, and somewhat more legendary. They would've been more like Beethoven is today.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

Besides a few of his orchestral pieces and the octet, I dislike his music; his piano music especially. I find it flashy, surface-oriented, and it never seems to go anywhere. It's like being on a musical treadmill, there's movement but it still feels stuck in the same place. Even his minor-keyed "passionate" works all sound like artifice and imitation of older composers. If he living longer than 38 meant we'd have even more of the Songs without Words, then I don't think we missed out on much. Give those years to Schubert or Mozart.


----------



## Brad (Mar 27, 2014)

trazom said:


> Besides a few of his orchestral pieces and the octet, I dislike his music; his piano music especially. I find it flashy, surface-oriented, and it never seems to go anywhere. It's like being on a musical treadmill, there's movement but it still feels stuck in the same place. Even his minor-keyed "passionate" works all sound like artifice and imitation of older composers. If he living longer than 38 meant we'd have even more of the chintzy Songs without Words, then I don't we missed out on much. Give those years to Schubert or Mozart.


Fair enough. I agree with you though, I would much rather like to see late Schubert. Mozart would've been interesting as well.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

trazom said:


> Besides a few of his orchestral pieces and the octet, I dislike his music; his piano music especially. I find it flashy, surface-oriented, and it never seems to go anywhere. It's like being on a musical treadmill, there's movement but it still feels stuck in the same place. Even his minor-keyed "passionate" works all sound like artifice and imitation of older composers. If he living longer than 38 meant we'd have even more of the Songs without Words, then I don't think we missed out on much. Give those years to Schubert or Mozart.


Check out Mendelssohn's string quartets and two piano trios if you haven't already. It contains some of his best music.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

trazom said:


> Besides a few of his orchestral pieces and the octet, I dislike his music; his piano music especially. I find it flashy, surface-oriented, and it never seems to go anywhere. It's like being on a musical treadmill, there's movement but it still feels stuck in the same place. Even his minor-keyed "passionate" works all sound like artifice and imitation of older composers. If he living longer than 38 meant we'd have even more of the Songs without Words, then I don't think we missed out on much. Give those years to Schubert or Mozart.


Interesting -- to take an example, I don't find any of what you describe in the following:






... but that may just be me!


----------



## Perotin (May 29, 2012)

Mendelssohn is among my top 5 or 10 favourite composers. I'm glad there are people who know how to appreciate his music. Greatly underestimated composer, not among the connoisseurs though. :lol:


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

^^^ Well he's definitely in my top 5. His string quartets and piano trios are second to none.

I consider his astonishing final string quartet in f minor opus 80 the greatest string quartet ever written.


----------



## CypressWillow (Apr 2, 2013)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> Here is one of the best interpretations of the 5th I've heard. They managed to bring up the color without losing momentum.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lovely performance. Thanks so much for bringing this to my attention.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Perotin said:


> Mendelssohn is among my top 5 or 10 favourite composers. I'm glad there are people who know how to appreciate his music. Greatly underestimated composer, not among the connoisseurs though. :lol:


Well, I find that the older I get the less patience I have with the sort of attitude that goes, "If it's popular with the public, it must not really be any good."


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

trazom said:


> Besides a few of his orchestral pieces and the octet, I dislike his music; his piano music especially. I find it flashy, surface-oriented, and it never seems to go anywhere. It's like being on a musical treadmill, there's movement but it still feels stuck in the same place. Even his minor-keyed "passionate" works all sound like artifice and imitation of older composers. If he living longer than 38 meant we'd have even more of the Songs without Words, then I don't think we missed out on much. Give those years to Schubert or Mozart.


Actually, I can understand what you mean when you write that his music "never seems to go anywhere." I've gotten the same impression with other non-Italian music -- that it's kind of...meandering, for lack of a better word. By contrast, I always know where Verdi's or Donizetti's or Bellini's music is "going" -- maybe their music has a stronger rhythmic backbone(?) Anyway, I'm not a musician so I can't really express what I mean in more specific terms than this. Maybe someone else can comment on the difference between Italian and German music.

Edited to add: Beethoven's music strikes me as having a very strong rhythmic backbone, too, as does Rossini's.


----------



## Fugue Meister (Jul 5, 2014)

hpowders said:


> ^^^ Well he's definitely in my top 5. His string quartets and piano trios are second to none.
> 
> I consider his astonishing final string quartet in f minor opus 80 the greatest string quartet ever written.


Those are some mighty strong words hpowders, are you forgetting Beethoven's late quartets? Surely you don't feel as though they surpass those? Maybe it's because I just discovered Mendelssohn's and I need to learn them entirely but I doubt any quartets will take Beethoven's down from their high, high pedestal.

All that being said, I still quite enjoy Mendelssohn, and I used to feel he didn't really go anywhere musically but I can attest that this changes with age... In my twenties I didn't give him the time of day and now I cycle him into my music samplings frequently and he's quickly gaining more points with me him and Haydn.


----------



## Fugue Meister (Jul 5, 2014)

Bellinilover said:


> Actually, I can understand what you mean when you write that his music "never seems to go anywhere." I've gotten the same impression with other non-Italian music -- that it's kind of...meandering, for lack of a better word. By contrast, I always know where Verdi's or Donizetti's or Bellini's music is "going" -- maybe their music has a stronger rhythmic backbone(?) Anyway, I'm not a musician so I can't really express what I mean in more specific terms than this. Maybe someone else can comment on the difference between Italian and German music.
> 
> Edited to add: Beethoven's music strikes me as having a very strong rhythmic backbone, too, as does Rossini's.


I can't really comment on the differences between Italian and German music but I just thought it was interesting your post is sort of the opposite of what I feel. For me with the exception of Scarlatti and Vivaldi, I find Italian music doesn't seem to go anywhere or perhaps it does but it takes eons to get there... way to much bel canto style even in the non operatic music.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Fugue Meister said:


> I can't really comment on the differences between Italian and German music but I just thought it was interesting your post is sort of the opposite of what I feel. For me with the exception of Scarlatti and Vivaldi, I find Italian music doesn't seem to go anywhere or perhaps it does but it takes eons to get there... way to much bel canto style even in the non operatic music.


Yeah, it's interesting how the same thing can strike different people in opposite ways. If there's a type of "classical" music I've always felt a natural affinity for, it's Italian bel canto -- Rossini, Donizetti, Bellini, and Verdi, especially early and middle Verdi. I'm of Italian descent myself, so maybe it's something in the blood.


----------



## Fugue Meister (Jul 5, 2014)

Hey don't get me wrong Verdi can be riveting and I like his work a great deal.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

Fugue Meister said:


> All that being said, I still quite enjoy Mendelssohn, and I used to feel he didn't really go anywhere musically but I can attest that this changes with age... In my twenties I didn't give him the time of day and now I cycle him into my music samplings frequently and he's quickly gaining more points with me him and Haydn.


It does change with age, but in the opposite direction for me. I liked playing his piano music when I was 12 because it's showy and frequently a lot easier to play than it sounds, but now compared to other piano works, they sound so stale and chintzy. The Fsharp minor piece from the Songs Without Words posted above is just what I don't like about his piano music: It sounds like a severely watered-down Bach piece, with added sentimentality and prettiness.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> The Fifth is actually an earlier work and not nearly as good as the more popular Third and Fourth.
> 
> I think the order of composition was as follows:
> 1, 5, 4, 3, 2.
> ...


And yet I always felt that it is the "Reformation" that sounds more advanced (or mature) than the rest.


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

I have a recording of his piano sextet and I am so in love whit that work. Anyone have a positive reaction to this work?


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

DrMuller said:


> I have been wondering; is Mendelssohn a seriously underrated composers? I know he as regarded as one of the better ones of the early romantic ere but seriously I don't see much speculation about him or his music. I have read alot of posts here and I don't remember reading anything about him, alot of talk about Brahms, Tchaikovsky and many others. I have been listening to him for the last few days and I am so in love with his music; his mature Violin Concerto, Symphonies No. 3 and No. 4, Midsummers Night's Dream, Hebrides Overture, Piano Concerto No. 1, Songs without Word, Piano Sextet and other beautifully written chamber music. These works aren't just decent but pretty amazing, at least in my opinion. I have been watching "Whole Notes" about the great composers, they did alot of them but no Mendelssohn. I was just wondering any way.


He was probably the most consistent in quality as a child prodigy, I would say greater than Mozart as a child prodigy (that is to say when both were children writing music).


----------



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

Had he lived longer, I wonder if Mendelssohn would have tried to make more inroads into opera, as this was the principal area where success had eluded him. Even though he wrote a couple of fine oratorios and cut his teeth writing singspiele, opera obviously isn't the same and I'm not totally sure if he had the necessary instinct (or 'nose') for the dramatic to bring about any lasting success in the theatre. Who knows - perhaps he thought the same.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Mendelssohn's best work for me was in chamber music-his piano trios and string quartets.
Those just listening to his symphonies are missing a lot.


----------

