Brahms, acolytes, followers, in his wake, his influence .....

[Beef Oven!]

Brahms never clicked with me until a year or so ago. Not just because I'm a Bruckner/Wagner man through and through - his music just never resonated with me (as said, until a year or so ago).

On a break in Italy recently I had much music on my trusted (but soon to be superseded FiiO DAP) and it was the Brahmsian music that really caught my ear. Some Schoenberg and especially Pfitzner. HP's piano trio is an amazing piece of music, but so indebted to Brahms.

Coincidentally, on my return, many CDs were awaiting me on my doormat, despite my avowal for downloads. One of which was a Philips Duo of Dvorak Trios. Such is the Brahms debt, IMHO.

We don't talk so much about Brahms on here, but is his legacy not enormous?



.

[Serial_Apologist]

We don't talk so much about Brahms on here, but is his legacy not enormous?

I would describe the Brahms legacy as temporary on the superficial stylistic plane - Dvorak (as you say), Mahler, Strauss, Reger, Schmidt, Schoeck, Stanford, Parry, Elgar, early Pfitzner, early Zemlinsky, early Schoenberg, Berg and Webern, early Bartok and Kodaly, early Hindemith, Medtner - but deeper inasmuch that his formal innovations in the direction of integrating inner contrapuntal voicings harmonically, and dissolving the Exposition/Development/Recapitulation/Coda seamlines of Sonata Form to make for continuous wholes, had a strong influence by way of Reger on Schoenberg's working methods in the 12-tone period, including in the few tonal compositions written at that time. Even before that, stylistic traits are still audible in 3rdVS works of the free atonal period, eg Schoenberg's piano pieces Ops 11 and 19 and the "Hanging Gardens" songs, and Berg's Piano Sonata Op 1, slome of the songs Op 2 and even as late as the Chamber Concerto of 1921, with its love of sensuously meandering thirds. It's interesting that Zemlinsky felt the necessity to compose idiomatically in the Brahms style - viz the first two symphonies and the Piano Trio - before taking on post-Wagerian advances in the harmonic sphere in his 1899 opera "Es War Ein Mal", feeling that Wagner lacked the structural tightness to apply to the classical forms which were being reassessed as the basis from which he and the Second Viennese composers felt it necessary to embrace in order to take the next step in the evolution of the Austro-German tradition, with its emphasis on integrity and continuity.

[Beef Oven!]

I would describe the Brahms legacy as temporary on the superficial stylistic plane - Dvorak (as you say), Mahler, Strauss, Reger, Schmidt, Schoeck, Stanford, Parry, Elgar, early Pfitzner, early Zemlinsky, early Schoenberg, Berg and Webern, early Bartok and Kodaly, early Hindemith, Medtner - but deeper inasmuch that his formal innovations in the direction of integrating inner contrapuntal voicings harmonically, and dissolving the Exposition/Development/Recapitulation/Coda seamlines of Sonata Form to make for continuous wholes, had a strong influence by way of Reger on Schoenberg's working methods in the 12-tone period, including in the few tonal compositions written at that time. Even before that, stylistic traits are still audible in 3rdVS works of the free atonal period, eg Schoenberg's piano pieces Ops 11 and 19 and the "Hanging Gardens" songs, and Berg's Piano Sonata Op 1, slome of the songs Op 2 and even as late as the Chamber Concerto of 1921, with its love of sensuously meandering thirds. It's interesting that Zemlinsky felt the necessity to compose idiomatically in the Brahms style - viz the first two symphonies and the Piano Trio - before taking on post-Wagerian advances in the harmonic sphere in his 1899 opera "Es War Ein Mal", feeling that Wagner lacked the structural tightness to apply to the classical forms which were being reassessed as the basis from which he and the Second Viennese composers felt it necessary to embrace in order to take the next step in the evolution of the Austro-German tradition, with its emphasis on integrity and continuity.

Great post - I understood 18% of it

[Serial_Apologist]

Great post - I understood 18% of it

Let me know which 18%, then I'll ignore the rest!

[richardfinegold]

[QUOTE=Beef Oven!;671300]

Coincidentally, on my return, many CDs were awaiting me on my doormat, despite my avowal for downloads. One of which was a Philips Duo of Dvorak Trios. Such is the Brahms debt, IMHO.

We don't talk so much about Brahms on here, but is his legacy not enormous?
End Quote

Was Dvorak actually influenced by Brahms? Or was it more of a case of two Composers that shared a lot of traits? If anything, the influence went both ways. Brahms greatly admired the Slavonic Dances, and also Dvorak’s Cello Concerto, saying that he would have written one if he could have known the possibilities that Dvorak demonstrated.
BeefO might enjoy the bit that Schoenberg wrote about Brahms, titled: Brahms: The Progressive. Best enjoyed while listening to AS orchestration of the Piano Quartet.

[BBMmk2]

Schoenberg greatly admired Brahms, for his structure and phrasing. I love his music. I have a few recordings of his piano music, etc. Other composers that have been mentioned like Pfitzner, must look further.

That Trio, you mentioned, any recordings?

[rauschwerk]

[QUOTE=richardfinegold;671327]

Was Dvorak actually influenced by Brahms? Or was it more of a case of two Composers that shared a lot of traits?

One trait, perhaps the most significant, was surely both composers' reverence for Beethoven. It is true that, as Peter Gammond once wrote, Dvorak had '... an inordinate admiration for Brahms and Wagner, which sometimes (my italics) made him try to write their works instead of his own...", but although superficial similarities between some passages in Dvorak's 6th symphony and Brahms's 2nd have been observed, you really couldn't mistake one work for the other.

[Beef Oven!]

Schoenberg greatly admired Brahms, for his structure and phrasing. I love his music. I have a few recordings of his piano music, etc. Other composers that have been mentioned like Pfitzner, must look further.

That Trio, you mentioned, any recordings?

Yes, an excellent one on the labels Dabringhaus und Grimm, CPO and the one I have on Challenge Classics. Maybe other recordings that I don't know.

Meanwhile .....

[Beef Oven!]

I would describe the Brahms legacy as temporary on the superficial stylistic plane - Dvorak (as you say), Mahler, Strauss, Reger, Schmidt, Schoeck, Stanford, Parry, Elgar, early Pfitzner, early Zemlinsky, early Schoenberg, Berg and Webern, early Bartok and Kodaly, early Hindemith, Medtner - but deeper inasmuch that his formal innovations in the direction of integrating inner contrapuntal voicings harmonically, and dissolving the Exposition/Development/Recapitulation/Coda seamlines of Sonata Form to make for continuous wholes, had a strong influence by way of Reger on Schoenberg's working methods in the 12-tone period, including in the few tonal compositions written at that time. Even before that, stylistic traits are still audible in 3rdVS works of the free atonal period, eg Schoenberg's piano pieces Ops 11 and 19 and the "Hanging Gardens" songs, and Berg's Piano Sonata Op 1, slome of the songs Op 2 and even as late as the Chamber Concerto of 1921, with its love of sensuously meandering thirds. It's interesting that Zemlinsky felt the necessity to compose idiomatically in the Brahms style - viz the first two symphonies and the Piano Trio - before taking on post-Wagerian advances in the harmonic sphere in his 1899 opera "Es War Ein Mal", feeling that Wagner lacked the structural tightness to apply to the classical forms which were being reassessed as the basis from which he and the Second Viennese composers felt it necessary to embrace in order to take the next step in the evolution of the Austro-German tradition, with its emphasis on integrity and continuity.

Yes, I think that much of the apparent similarities in many of those that followed Brahms are superficial.

But that's quite a list that you produce, with definite Brahms influence.

[Serial_Apologist]

Yes, I think that much of the apparent similarities in many of those that followed Brahms are superficial.

But that's quite a list that you produce, with definite Brahms influence.

In listening to the post-Brahmins it's always fascinating to hear them developing his harmonic language in ways Brahms himself was possibly fending off like the plague. I listen to this stuff, plus the Reger chamber works (rather than the neo-Bachian organ works) and ditto the early Zemlinsky, and when I go back to Brahms I hear him differently, for that unrealised potential, as well as with respect and admiration for how much he was able to wring out of sticking to the rules as hard as his conscience presumably dictated. Thanks for the Pfitzner link, interesting ambiguous time signature shifts there, more suggestive of the later Schumann than Brahms himself - I'm unfamiliar with most of Pfitzner's music, though having previously heard some early songs as well as these works, now I can safely say the Brahms cap Pfitz! For unmodified post Wagnerism some of the French orchestral composers of the time are a salutary listen - Chausson, d'Indy, the Dukas symphony. It's like the Gestalt Theory guy said - you approach listening to the simpler in terms of the more complex, rather than the other way around - though that was is always preferable if you want to prise out the new things happening in it initially - and that way, going back to Beethvoen, Mozart and Bach after getting into Schoenberg and co, has enabled me to appreciate the Classics more again, after a period of finding their stuff stale. It's also clear to me why Debussy had to shrug off the Wagner influence in French music if music, regardless of Frenchness or anything else non-Germanic, was to, erm, "move forward".

[Lat-Literal]

I prefer the idea of Brahms to the idea of any other German or Austrian composer.

Mainly as an unfashionable, unobtrusive and minimally influential counterweight to most of the others who I can often find too huge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOlc2PAiWUU

[BBMmk2]

I prefer the idea of Brahms to the idea of any other German or Austrian composer.

Mainly as an unfashionable, unobtrusive and minimally influential counterweight to most of the others who I can often find too huge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOlc2PAiWUU

Lat-Lit, a few arguments about this can ensue here!

I have to disagree with you ion this one though(if you were serious in your comment?)

As I said earlier, Schoenberg had great respect for Brahms.

[Bryn]

. . . Schoenberg had great respect for Brahms.

Indeed: https://friedfoo.wordpress.com/music...e-progressive/

See page 57 of this pdf (page 52 of the original publication).

[Lat-Literal]

Lat-Lit, a few arguments about this can ensue here!

I have to disagree with you ion this one though(if you were serious in your comment?)

As I said earlier, Schoenberg had great respect for Brahms.

Indeed: https://friedfoo.wordpress.com/music...e-progressive/

See page 57 of this pdf (page 52 of the original publication).

I was mostly being serious, I think.

But I am prepared to be open minded on the part about his influence.

[ardcarp]

Indeed: https://friedfoo.wordpress.com/music...e-progressive/

See page 57 of this pdf (page 52 of the original publication).

Another slant:

http://davidsbuendler.freehostia.com/sberg.htm