# Brahms 2 - masterpiece or lesser work?



## Bone (Jan 19, 2013)

I'm hopeful I'm not the only one with a sneaking suspicion that Brahms 2 is considered the ugly stepchild to the brilliant trio of 1,3, and 4.
I'm curious because I am a devout Kleiber fanatic and have recently begun to change my opinion of #2 on the strength of his performance with VPO. Seeing him play the group like a piano and hearing them respond to his every gesture is only part of the thrill: the music lives in an entirely different world from what I've heard before (or since). Is it just this magnificent moment in time that gives the piece such a boost or is it really just a neglected masterpiece that we (I) have neglected? Here is the video - if 8:00 doesn't almost make you choke up, replay from the beginning (repeatedly if necessary).


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I've always thought it a masterpiece in whatever version, though I think No. 1 is one of my favorite Beethoven symphonies.  In No. 2 you can almost hear Brahm's famous lullaby in the first movement. I always got a kick out of that. This version is indeed very good.


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

Fantastic performance, first. Thank you for the post.

Second, just in response, I've never considered Brahms 2nd to be a lesser work than his other symphonies. IMO The 1st is his thinnest, least expressive piece. I understand many would disagree.

I've always noticed how the 2nd and 3rd symphony end on a similar pattern. The finales begin with a soft, tense melody ready to burst - though the 2nd ends powerfully, and the 3rd ends peacefully. Personally, I find how the opening theme links to these respective endings clues me in on why I've always preferred the 3rd (and 4th) over the 2nd.

I find the 3rd a more attractive symphony as a whole -- with this particular exit -- because the initial theme, once dominant and forceful is reserved to this fleeting release in the finale. The 2nd does not pair the main theme as well, IMO. I find the finale in the 2nd terribly inviting, but with a rather stagnant adagio and the third mvt. erupting for a _scherzo-jig_ randomly amongst the otherwise patient theme, I do believe the symphony as a whole does not mesh as well together. I believe the 3rd's opening pronouncement retains its mark through the (also stagnant) andante and melancholic -- or it could be pleasant at the same time? -- third mvt. In general, I find it ties together smoother -- and cleaner -- than the 2nd.

Of course, this is just _my _ears speaking.


----------



## Webernite (Sep 4, 2010)

The second symphony has, to my ears, a different kind of sound from the other symphonies: a darker sound, closer to the piano concerti and the chamber music with piano. The first movement is the longest Allegro in his oeuvre if the conductor takes the repeat, yet I seem to remember that Brahms said "this symphony might almost be called a sinfonietta" (or said something like that). It is less tempestuous than the other symphonies, and the allusions and modellings that I think I can hear are from Mozart, not from Beethoven; the beginning is a rewrite of the Adagio introduction to Mozart's D major String Quintet, and the slow movement and the last movement take something from the second and third movements of the _Prague_ Symphony, which is also in D major.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

I regard the symphonies as a package deal, a progression in emotional 'engineering' processes from a strong beginning. I prefer to listen to them in sequence; they are strong medicine, so I take one per day.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

right on Hilltroll. Brahms-a-day is a wonderful thing!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

In the summer Brahms used to relax in rural settings so that he could concentrate on composing and in 1877 he was in Portshach on the Worthersee.
Having spent fifteen years putting together his first symphony he had no such problen with his second.
He wrote "Here it is delightful indeed....with so many melodies flying about that one must be careful not to step on any".
The second symphony might be called his "Pastoral" in contrast to his dramatic and serious first.
It certainly is not some kind of odd one out.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Sonata said:


> right on Hilltroll. Brahms-a-day is a wonderful thing!


One Brahms opus number per day, every day, clears the mind and does no harm to one's complexion.


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

I've just made a statistically unsure verification of the statement in the what RU listening to thread; masterpiece of less. And my conclusion it is "Less", it is lacking something elevating like an obbligato organ! Sorry to all Brahmsians out there, but this is a final (in)conclusion!

/ptr


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

ptr said:


> I've just made a statistically unsure verification of the statement in the what RU listening to thread; masterpiece of less. And my conclusion it is "Less", it is lacking something elevating like an obbligato organ! Sorry to all Brahmsians out there, but this is a final (in)conclusion!
> 
> /ptr


Did you miss the theremin solo in the 2nd movement?


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Did you miss the theremin solo in the 2nd movement?


Darn, it must be much to subtle for my ears! 

/ptr


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Definitely in the top ten greatest symphonies of all time. Get the Kubelik recording.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Masterpiece without question. Recs. enjoyed--HvK, Harnoncourt, Muti.


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

While it may be a masterpiece, it is not for me. I don't like Brahms when he's all autumnal and mellow; I prefer him when he's wrestling with Beethoven, raging against the Gods, or expressing his frustration about Clara!


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

Why isn't it a masterpiece? - as great as most works written, and have loved ever since I bought an ancient LP at a jumble sale of a recording featuring no other than a conductor called Arturo Toscanini & the NBC S O. when I was about twelve years old.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

It's a beautiful offset to the other, more turbulent, symphonies.

There's really nothing that Brahms composed that I dislike. Plus the finale is very exciting and vivacious.


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

Novelette said:


> There's really nothing that Brahms composed that I dislike. Plus the finale is very exciting and vivacious.


Yes. This, for all intensive debates on whether Brahms was a brilliant or banal composer, illustrates that many look past the conclusion -- which I am in concurrence with -- that Brahms' work is nevertheless attractive and highly rewarding.

On that note, I concede my past prejudice on the _Second Symphony_, that I consistently avoided and denounced its value in contrast with Brahms' other symphonies. I was absolutely mistaken. After a dozen listens over the past month, consequently by reading and responding to this very thread, I must now admit this _is_ a masterpiece.


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

I enjoy no. 2 more than 1&3. 
No.4 shades it as my fave though. 
All 4 are masterworks of course.


----------



## MrCello (Nov 25, 2011)

It's a good symphony, but after playing it last year I realized I don't care much for it honestly.


----------



## unpocoscherzando (Sep 24, 2011)

It is one of Brahms' greatest masterpieces, in my opinion, alongside the three other symphonies.


----------



## Amateur (Mar 21, 2013)

Not surprised Carlos turned you on to 2. How he gets everyone singing! And 2 is a wonderfully vocal symphony, reminding us how much time Brahms spent with vocal groups and, of course, writing gorgeous songs. 
I suspect Brahms was very consciously turning away from the "Beethoven's 10th" praise heaped on his 1st symphony by Hans von Bulow, but does that make the lyrical 2nd a lesser work? Are Beethoven's even-numbered symphomnies inferior to the more heroic odd-numbered ones (not counting his 1st)? Actually some people think so. I just responded to another thread and defended Beethoven's 2nd (the Larghetto is one of my favorite movements by anyone). 
Anyway, aren't we lucky to have that Kleiber preserved? You may also enjoy Bruno Walter's rehearsal excerpts of Brahms 2. 
Cheers.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

MagneticGhost said:


> I enjoy no. 2 more than 1&3.
> No.4 shades it as my fave though.
> All 4 are masterworks of course.


I'd probably put them in that order myself. In some ways I think Brahms found his symphonic voice more in this piece, joining himself to the romantic 'pastoralism' of the time too.


----------

