# Mahler vs Schoenberg



## BenG (Aug 28, 2018)

I know Schoenberg and Mahler disagreed about whether tonality should be maintained. I was just reading about how Schoenberg visited Mahler's house and they had an argument about this, Schoenberg left and never returned. Some time after that incident, Schoenberg wrote a letter to apologise and praise his works. I think Mahler has a bigger fan-base today but it would be interesting to know what you think. I personally am more familiar with Mahler's compositions, but I've heard that some of Schoenberg's works are somewhat Mahlerian. Anyway, which composer do you prefer and how would you compare their music?


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

I don't really want to compare their music, but I will say that it's fairly well-known that Schoenberg adored tonal music and felt drawn to it throughout his life. His decision to pursue his path through atonality to the development of 12-tone composition seems to be wholly justifiable from an artistic vanguard point-of-view.

Personally I prefer Schoenberg's music. I like Mahler's too, but his symphonies are stupidly overlong.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

eugeneonagain said:


> I don't really want to compare their music, but I will say that it's fairly well-known that Schoenberg adored tonal music and felt drawn to it throughout his life. His decision to pursue his path through atonality to the development of 12-tone composition seems to be wholly justifiable from an artistic vanguard point-of-view.
> 
> Personally I prefer Schoenberg's music. I like *Mahler's* too, but his *symphonies are stupidly overlong.*


Too bad you weren't alive at that time and left your criticism in the suggestion box at the left side of Mahler's hut at Maiernigg.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I think that both Mahler and Schoenberg would agree that the simple diatonic approach to music was _waay_ too limited. Even Mahler himself had been stretching the limits. Some of Mahler's dissonant chords in the 9th and 10th are similar to Schoenberg's "Pelleas" chord...or was it Transfigured Night? I forget.

I mean, what would we all be doing now, if it hadn't been stretched? Listening to Medieval and Baroque music?

Diatonic scale, 1234567, leaving out 5 notes...7 + 5 = 12, or, rather 12 _minus_ five equals your little diatonic scale. 
Do I dare include an accidental? Do I dare eat a peach? 
Goodness me! What a nice little system!
The key signatures all fit nicely, and there are only four which overlap under different names, but we must keep it nice and proper if a C-flat is called for. 
Each one has its own letter name as well! Except for that darned diminished chord...

Mother! I need some help here! My tonality is unraveling!


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Schönberg.
I think Mahler sounds too messy or should I say formless.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

I like Schoenberg a lot but I easily prefer Mahler, he is a top 5 o 6 composer for me.


“Gustav Mahler was a Saint,” said Arnold Schoenberg in 1912.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Yeah, Mahler tended to wander a lot. Some of it seems unfocussed, like a bunch of chamber music ideas all strung together. I don't walk away from the music with a sense of unity in one idea. But they were both in league to steal Wagner's thunder, in the name of oppressed peoples everywhere, so I gotta support them. Schoenberg could probably have done it, if he hadn't gone off the rails with that theory of his. But then again, one non-existent key center is as good as another, especially when they both resist Schenkerian analysis. Where's the root?


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

eugeneonagain said:


> I don't really want to compare their music, but I will say that it's fairly well-known that Schoenberg adored tonal music and felt drawn to it throughout his life. His decision to pursue his path through atonality to the development of 12-tone composition seems to be wholly justifiable from an artistic vanguard point-of-view.
> 
> Personally I prefer Schoenberg's music. I like Mahler's too, but *his symphonies are stupidly overlong.*


Funnily enough for you, maybe, Mahler's 3rd symphony is his longest and Schoenberg himself considered it "a work of genius".


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

jdec said:


> Funnily enough for you, maybe, Mahler's 3rd symphony is his longest and Schoenberg himself considered it "a work of genius".


Schoenberg liked those 3-day Wagner operas, too. But in the end, what good did it do him? He ended up at UCLA teaching elementary counterpoint to spoiled California brats, and played ping-pong.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> Schoenberg liked those 3-day Wagner operas, too. *But in the end, what good did it do him? He ended up at UCLA teaching elementary counterpoint to spoiled California brats, and played ping-pong.*


Well, I will not judge Schoenberg's sapientia based on how he ended up his professional career.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

hpowders said:


> Too bad you weren't alive at that time and left your criticism in the suggestion box at the left side of Mahler's hut at Maiernigg.


I know, could have subsequently saved everyone at least four days of their lives at least.

I might also have tipped him off about Alma's escapades.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

jdec said:


> Well, I will not judge Schoenberg's sapientia based on how he ended up his professional career.


Nothing wrong with teaching elementary counterpoint. It's honorable and takes certain skills. Can you imagine Beethoven up in the front of the classroom, trying to teach counterpoint? The blast wave would be felt in Cincinnati.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

jdec said:


> Well, *I will not judge Schoenberg's sapientia based on how he ended up his professional career.*


Don't you hate it when people quote you, and put your words in boldface? It makes it seem like you were yelling at them. Actually, I was referring to something much deeper, along those Wagnerian lines. But I'll not go there.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Nothing wrong with teaching elementary counterpoint. It's honorable and takes certain skills. Can you imagine Beethoven up in the front of the classroom, trying to teach counterpoint? The blast wave would be felt in Cincinnati.


Would that have been from his breath?

I'm not dissing Schoenberg for that; after all, we wouldn't have _Structural Functions_. I was alluding to something much more sinister...but as I told jdec, I'll not go there. BTW, nice to see ya, Ken.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> *Don't you hate it when people quote you, and put your words in boldface? It makes it seem like you were yelling at them*. Actually, I was referring to something much deeper, along those Wagnerian lines. But I'll not go there.


No, I don't, many members here do it. The intention on that is not what you say but a different thing, but I'll not go there.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

eugeneonagain said:


> I know, could have subsequently saved everyone at least four days of their lives at least.
> 
> I might also have tipped him off about *Alma*'s escapades.


 We might have been deprived of some of the first *soul* music ever written.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

millionrainbows said:


> I think that both Mahler and Schoenberg would agree that the simple diatonic approach to music was _waay_ too limited. Even Mahler himself had been stretching the limits. Some of Mahler's dissonant chords in the 9th and 10th are similar to Schoenberg's "Pelleas" chord...or was it Transfigured Night? I forget.
> 
> I mean, what would we all be doing now, if it hadn't been stretched? Listening to Medieval and Baroque music?
> 
> ...


Diatonic approach limited? I tend to disagree. Atonal music is way more limited.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> Do I dare include an accidental? Do I dare eat a peach?


Good one! I'm a fan of rolled trousers myself.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Which Schoenberg? Arnold, Harrison, or Murray?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I wouldn't know how to compare them. Mahler was a symphonist who occasionally wrote songs and, of course, a distinguished conductor. Schoenberg wrote lots of music but was no symphonist, really, and did not have a conducting career. I like both. I think that to date I have probably had more pleasure from Mahler than Schoenberg but it is close and Schoenberg, who wrote a lot more, is catching up! For a final judgement it will depend on when I die.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

eugeneonagain said:


> I don't really want to compare their music, but I will say that it's fairly well-known that Schoenberg adored tonal music and felt drawn to it throughout his life. His decision to pursue his path through atonality to the development of 12-tone composition seems to be wholly justifiable from an artistic vanguard point-of-view.
> 
> Personally I prefer Schoenberg's music. I like Mahler's too, but his symphonies are stupidly overlong.


To me, your (understandable) comment about Mahler's symphonies being too long is a perfect example of the profound change in how we approach music and many other things brought about by the technological revolution of the 20th century. Nowadays, many would think Wagner's operas are too long (if they bother with classical music at all, which they don't, as most of it is too long for them). Concerts in the 19th century generally were longer. Not many people read long books these days.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

*Don't you hate it when people quote you, and put your words in boldface? It makes it seem like you were yelling at them.*



jdec said:


> No, I don't, many members here do it. The intention on that is not what you say but a different thing, but I'll not go there.


I'm not interested in intentions; just net results.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

_I know, could have subsequently saved everyone at least four days of their lives at least._

_I might also have tipped him off about _*Alma's escapades.*



hpowders said:


> We might have been deprived of some of the first *soul* music ever written.


Wow, nice uses of boldface.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I prefer Mahler when I'm listening Mahler. And Schoenberg when I'm listening Schoenberg. But sometimes when I'm listening to one of those 35 minute Mahler movements, I wish I had put on some Schoenberg.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Phil loves classical said:


> Diatonic approach limited? I tend to disagree. Atonal music is way more limited.


Who said anything about atonal? _Any_ kind of music that is chromatic, or modulates a lot, or uses exotic scales, is limited by the diatonic key system. There are much better chromatic approaches to music out there. Diatonicism is archaic, unless it is applied to old diatonic music of past history, nursery rhymes, simple folk tunes, etc.
Real substance thread duty: Mahler and Schoenberg both knew this.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Manxfeeder said:


> Good one! I'm a fan of rolled trousers myself.


Do I dare look at Slonimsky's _Thesaurus of Scales and Melodic Patterns _while eating a peach?


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Not familiar with Schoenberg at all but do love Mahlers symphonies


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Judith said:


> Not familiar with Schoenberg at all but do love Mahlers symphonies


He's that bald-headed fellow who in every photograph looks like he's just been given some bad news.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Actual relevant substance thread duty: The best Mahler symphony set is, IMHO, the Bernstein/ New York Philharmonic set, but you've got to get the one that says "Carnegie Hall Presents" in red on the front. The remastering is superb.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

eugeneonagain said:


> He's that bald-headed fellow who in every photograph looks like he's just been given some bad news.


Bad news, yeah, like "You'll have to leave now. We don't like your kind."


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

I like to imagine that conversation, how it turned into a fight, how academic became personal, how the collegiality broke down, between two legends of composition on such a historical matter. I imagine Mahler's pride playing a factor, emotions in the breeze, while Arnold calmly picks him apart on one point of theory after another. 

Well, I guess that gave my bias away. To me, Mahler wrote 5 or 6 good symphonies, and a lot of great songs. He was best when he wasn't trying to be modern. He wrote no chamber music to speak of.

Schoenberg was best at the things Mahler wasn't, especially being modern. So they may have been jealous of each other to a high degree.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

eugeneonagain said:


> He's that bald-headed fellow who in every photograph looks like he's just been given some bad news.


Kinda like that smiley Mahler fellow who in every photo looks like he just found out his wife has been getting it on with one of his musical colleagues.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Actual substance thread duty: Schoenberg's first wife screwed around on him, too. That was around the time of his first atonal works, wasn't it?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> Actual substance thread duty: Schoenberg's first wife screwed around on him, too. That was around the time of his first atonal works, wasn't it?


What's a woman to do when her lover locks himself in a hut for two months with pen and staff paper?


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

fluteman said:


> To me, your (understandable) comment about Mahler's symphonies being too long is a perfect example of the profound change in how we approach music and many other things brought about by the technological revolution of the 20th century. Nowadays, many would think Wagner's operas are too long (if they bother with classical music at all, which they don't, as most of it is too long for them). Concerts in the 19th century generally were longer. Not many people read long books these days.


You may be right in general; brevity is preferred these days, but I wouldn't count myself wholly among that group. I can tolerate a symphony that runs to an hour (then I start getting a bad back in my seat), but one and a half and longer is pushing it. I know he was writing epics in parts, like some sort of Proustian novel in musical form, but I'm sceptical of the idea that others in the past didn't also feel their patience challenged.

I suppose you have to be 'in a Mahler mood' to feel like they are so good you don't want them to stop. I've had that with Bruckner, but the honeymoon period is over and now and again I want him to get on with it and stop giving me minute details.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

starthrower said:


> What's a woman to do when her lover locks himself in a hut for two months with pen and staff paper?


Like Thoreau, she could do his laundry and bring him pies.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

millionrainbows said:


> Like Thoreau, she could do his laundry and bring him pies.


This may highlight the differences between ritzy 19th century Vienna and the backwoods that was Concord Massachusetts.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

eugeneonagain said:


> You may be right in general; brevity is preferred these days, but I wouldn't count myself wholly among that group. I can tolerate a symphony that runs to an hour (then I start getting a bad back in my seat), but one and a half and longer is pushing it. I know he was writing epics in parts, like some sort of Proustian novel in musical form, but I'm sceptical of the idea that others in the past didn't also feel their patience challenged.
> 
> I suppose you have to be 'in a Mahler mood' to feel like they are so good you don't want them to stop. I've had that with Bruckner, but the honeymoon period is over and now and again I want him to get on with it and stop giving me minute details.


I like that bigness. It demands your time. It makes them more "epic." After all, this was the very end of the "epic" era.

Plus, this was a shrewd move on Mahler's part. The recording industry was just starting up, which would have hurt the live concert industry, so he made his music long enough that it wouldn't fit on a 78 RPM record.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

eugeneonagain said:


> This may highlight the differences between ritzy 19th century Vienna and the backwoods that was Concord Massachusetts.


OK, change that pie for fancy pastries.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

What can I say..? I'm a pop-culture barbarian.

That's an interesting point about the music being fit for the concert hall and not a shellac disc.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> Actual substance thread duty: Schoenberg's first wife screwed around on him, too. That was around the time of his first atonal works, wasn't it?


Great. He gets mad at his wife and punishes the world in response.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

JAS said:


> Great. He gets mad at his wife and punishes the world in response.


Yes, that familiar scenario in which the dog finally gets kicked. That's what we're doing, kicking the dog. This is very important work.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

When I was cuckolded I just got annoyed and withdrew. I feel like I've failed artistically.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

For Gustav


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Mahler had beter hair so I'm superficially going with him. Shame about the lack of facial hair. That would have been an even bigger clincher.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

philoctetes said:


> For Gustav


I've been reading a speech Gould gave in 1964 about Schoenberg called 'Schoenberg: A Perspective' (I've still not finished reading it). It's worth a look.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

For Arnie! This is really good. Paul Jacobs was _keeller_ on Schoenberg.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

eugeneonagain said:


> You may be right in general; brevity is preferred these days, but I wouldn't count myself wholly among that group. I can tolerate a symphony that runs to an hour (then I start getting a bad back in my seat), but one and a half and longer is pushing it. I know he was writing epics in parts, like some sort of Proustian novel in musical form, but I'm sceptical of the idea that others in the past didn't also feel their patience challenged.
> 
> I suppose you have to be 'in a Mahler mood' to feel like they are so good you don't want them to stop. I've had that with Bruckner, but the honeymoon period is over and now and again I want him to get on with it and stop giving me minute details.


Well, we can't speak for 19th century audiences, but we can read about concerts of that time, and they were often far longer than nearly anything these days. When I was a young 'un, I had a job that often required me to work late into the night, or even through the entire night, but with hours of down time. This was before the internet (I guess it was already around but still mainly a tool for scientists and academics), so I decided to pass the empty hours by reading Remembrance of Things Past, start to finish, and completed it in a couple of months.

Since then, I've reread parts, and read books about Proust and his era, but let's face it, I'll never again read the entire novel, though one could easily think of it as seven separate novels, and read them over the course of a year or two. The challenge lies not in its shear length. After all, Anthony Trollope wrote the Barsetshire novels, a series of six long books also dealing with the same characters, but genial, entertaining and relatively easy reading, in my opinion (and brilliant and wonderful, this isn't a knock against Trollope).

The main thing that makes Proust such challenging reading is the subtle, detailed, meticulous to the nth degree, and above all gradual way he develops his ideas. It takes a lot of patience and stamina to stay with him and follow the immense, elaborate arcs he constructs. One could also say something like that about Mahler symphonies. Is it worth the effort in either case? I have no definitive answer.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

philoctetes said:


> For Gustav


For Arnold


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

I find very little of Schoenberg’s music pleasurable. I much prefer Berg, Webern, and Roberto Gerhard.
Mahler is essential for me


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Triplets said:


> I find very little of Schoenberg's music pleasurable. I much prefer Berg, Webern, and Roberto Gerhard.
> Mahler is essential for me


Not even the Piano Concerto with Uchida?


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Or his 3rd string quartet? Or Five Pieces for Orchestra?


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Not even the Piano Concerto with Uchida?


I don't have that recording. I have Brendel, as part of a big Brendel Box, so maybe I'll trot it out.
I've tried a couple of times in my life to appreciate Schoenberg, mainly at the urging of friends, and it's just never happened, with either his tonal or 12 tone music. I've realized lately that It isn't 12 tone music per se that I don't appreciate, just Schoenberg himself. Roberto Gerhard writes 12 tone Music that somehow doesn't seem loaded with angst. Webern fascinates me because he makes his interesting points with such economy, and while Berg has the Schoenbergian angst, somehow he also manages to leaven with Mahlerian irony


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

eugeneonagain said:


> Or his 3rd string quartet? Or Five Pieces for Orchestra?


I've tried those works many times in my life and always my responses alternate between yawning and dyspepsia. I do like the Variations For Orchestra, although it isn't something I seek out very often.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Triplets said:


> I don't have that recording. I have Brendel, as part of a big Brendel Box, so maybe I'll trot it out.
> I've tried a couple of times in my life to appreciate Schoenberg, mainly at the urging of friends, and it's just never happened, with either his tonal or 12 tone music. I've realized lately that It isn't 12 tone music per se that I don't appreciate, just Schoenberg himself. Roberto Gerhard writes 12 tone Music that somehow doesn't seem loaded with angst. Webern fascinates me because he makes his interesting points with such economy, and while Berg has the Schoenbergian angst, somehow he also manages to leaven with Mahlerian irony


I see what you mean. Webern is straightforwardly modern, and more objective sounding. Schoenberg seemed to be struggling with his place in tradition versus his modernist tendencies. Schoenberg was very idiosyncratic, probably because he was an auto-didact, and not really a pianist or conductor of much note.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Triplets said:


> I don't have that recording. I have Brendel, as part of a big Brendel Box, so maybe I'll trot it out.
> I've tried a couple of times in my life to appreciate Schoenberg, mainly at the urging of friends, and it's just never happened, with either his tonal or 12 tone music. I've realized lately that It isn't 12 tone music per se that I don't appreciate, just Schoenberg himself. Roberto Gerhard writes 12 tone Music that somehow doesn't seem loaded with angst. Webern fascinates me because he makes his interesting points with such economy, and while Berg has the Schoenbergian angst, somehow he also manages to leaven with Mahlerian irony


Concerning your Gerhard characterization, it's the one I thought of regarding George Perle's music, which I have been listening to a lot recently.
I understand the reasons for preferring Schoenberg to Mahler, wouldn't be without any of them. Recordings mean quite a lot for experiencing the music; for example Schoenberg's piano works can sound both cold and bland, or crystalline and freshly vital, or dark and late-romantically coloured, IMO.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

joen_cph said:


> for example Schoenberg's piano works can sound both cold and bland, or crystalline and freshly vital, or dark and late-romantically coloured, IMO.


A very accurate description. I've experienced both of those when listening to Schoenberg's piano music (which sometimes is highly _un_-pianistic). Depending on my mood it can be dull plodding and sharp pangs of noise, or like seeing clearly after a fog has lifted.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

I find one thing in common among the pair: neither are on my everyday playlist and I find neither's music, generally speaking, very compelling. Both are interesting in small doses but not consistent enough to keep my interest over time. I have as many recordings of Hummel and Khachaturian as either of these two and I find the formers' music more challenging and interesting.

I think, had Mahler come from Georgia (USA) and attended the college they'd have dedicated their theme song -- _The Rambling Wreck From Georgia Tech_ -- to his symphonies.


----------

