beauty in bach and mozart.

[nervous_wreck]

it's very very rare that i find a recording, or someone playing bach, where they're not just playing notes, and they actually feel what they are playing. I noticed as i was playing bach that i too, just started playing notes... and i want to be better than that. what am i missing? is there something i don't understand about bach that makes it hard for me to make it emotional?
also while playing mozart, it is difficult for me to understand. In romantic songs, it's very obvious what the piece is about, whether it's sad or happy. in mozart however... going through the song, i'm completely confused. alot of mozart is just oil flowing sixteenth notes, and it is hard for me to find the emotional aspect of playing that. (even though it's beautiful it's still hard to figure out) does anyone have any tips or advice on what i'm missing in either of these 2 composers?

[BoliverAllmon]

with bach I feel it important to sing the melodies. Whether out loud or in your head, I just find the beauty that much easier when singing it. Just don't do it when performing. then it sucks.

[teresa_b]

How about thinking of Mozart as opera?  Listen to a recording of what you are studying, and observe the emotions that are created within yourself.   Singing the melodies sounds like a great idea here, too. 

Teresa

[bennom]

With Mozart: play slowly, sing every bit of the oil flowing sixteenth notes, like it was brahms, find every turn, every angle, every subtle change in the forest of "dead scales and arpeggios". Overdo it. Mix this daily practice with normal, leggiero "rokoko" style playing. This will get you started.

With Bach: My teacher forced me to do this in his polyphonic pieces (that is, virtually all of his music): First, soprano. Play it to the fore. Follow all the upgoing intervals, "sing them out", not with your own voice, with your fingers. Play the other voices to, but let them accompany the soprano. Then, soprano to the fore again. Now, follow all the downgoing intervals carefully. After this, do the alto in the same two ways. And then the tenor and base. It is very hard in the beginning, and hard to explain in writing as well... but it works, it works!!!

[steveie986]

Listen to Glenn Gould play Bach. Listen to his Goldberg Variations (first his 1955 recording, then the 1981 recording). Listen to Gould's Well-Tempered Clavier. Listen especially carefully to him singing along to the melody in the recordings. Then, if possible, watch the DVD of his 1981 recording of the Goldberg. Then listen to Murray Perahia's equally excellent recording of the Goldberg Variations. Finally, I recommend Zoltan Kocsis's recording of the Art of the Fugue on the piano. Then, you will have gotten a better sense of the excitement, passion, and state of wonder that is in Bach's keyboard music. After I discovered Glenn Gould, I never want to touch Chopin ever again.

[crazy for ivan moravec]

with bach you have to feel evry motion. feel the energy in every melody. the harmony will help.

it's difficult to feel because it's music that's so far from us (centuries old). but you can connect with it more if you read books on baroque stuff. anne rice has some books which give a good setting for some periods. "cry to heaven" is nice.

sometimes it will just come your way, you don't have to rush it. it takes maturity to feel it. i honestly think i don't feel it fully but there are times when i do, and with that, at least i know it will come.

[thaicheow]

I find bach is easier to get the emotional connection. I love every bach played by Rosalyn Tureck. You should have listened to her playing on Well tempered clavier. Emotionally, she is very manupulative. I love her playing, but scare to listen especially when I am low. Dun know anyone feel the same too??

For mozart, I myself also have difficulty to get the emotional right. I am playing some of his sonatas. It is hard when I come to the 2nd movement. Get a bit too emotional, my teacher will claim that it is too romantic. But definitely you cant claim that you feel nothing on Mozart.

[Barbosa-piano]

 I agree with crazy for Ivan Moravec. Bach is very rich in harmony, and even rythmic pulse. Just listening to every aspect of his music (Gigas, Preludios, Fugas) can be entertaining and in a way revitalizing. I think you should watch "Bach: The Great Composer". It will make you cry at the end. It relates his music to history and his life. It has given me a light to Bach's music.

[chelsey]

Andras Schiff is interesting for Mozart. Angela Hewitt is the best Bach pianist since Gould, her recordings are refreshing and strikingly beautiful.

[rc]

As soon as I read that you couldn't find any recordings where you felt an emotional connection to this music, I figured it must be how you're listening to it, as you then said ... Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

The main thing that can go wrong for a listener is to be applying the wrong aesthetic. Measuring everything by the same yardstick, so to speak. You have to look at each style within it's own context. Which is easy to say, but when you aren't familiar with a style how do you know it's context?

Basically, it takes time. I know I've never instantly got into a certain style, it's always been a gradual progression, gaining momentum as I begin to connect... I mean, this stuff was written hundreds of years ago, not too much for us to easily relate to.

So just give it the chance and it will grow on you. Often I will one day listen to something I've heard a dozen times before, but suddenly something in me 'clicks' and I'm able to get right into it.

Barbosa's onto something as well; it helps to understand the context in which these works were created. Check out some documentaries, and read a biography or two. I have an easier time appreciating the music if I can imagine how Mozart might have once played it for an audience, the things he might have been going through while composing, the world he might have lived in. Let your imagination fill in the details.

Something else that comes to mind, is perhaps we sometimes listen to music with 'piano-ears'... Having the bias of our instrument, possibly thinking too much along the lines of what the hands may be doing. Try listening to non-piano music of these composers. Bach's cantatas and Mozarts symphonies continually blow me away, I often take ideas from  non-piano music and apply it to the piano music, in playing and listening.

I hope you're able to develop an appreciation for this music, because it's beautiful stuff and you shouldn't miss out.

[contrapunctus]

I don't think much emotion should be put into Bach at all. Starkness and clarity are what I like to here. Dramatic and emotional Bach is terrible, in my opinion.

[Barbosa-piano]

Andras Schiff is interesting for Mozart.

      Interesting, I find Andras Schiff interesting not only for Mozart, but especially for Bach as well. As I have mentioned before in another thread, he has this unique Chopinesque way of playing Bach- I love that view, but some people really dislike it. It is quite amusing to sit down and listen to all the different ways Bach can be interpreted, and enjoy each style for its own characteristics.
      People usually do not aprove the playing of the piano as if it was a harpsichord- And there are some pianists that resemble this.
      I like Mozart's piano music played clearly, but not choppy- It can lose its essence if not played with great care for dinamics and style- I also think the main voices should be brought out above all in most cases in Mozart.
     There actually is an emotional aspect of playing these flowing sixteenth notes, in my point of view. If you look at it, it mimics many vocal aspects of the music in that time. You can't just finger these sixteenth note scales- I think there is a way to smoothly make these sound as variations of the main theme. These "sequences" connect two main notes which are harmonically connected. Mozart used these many times, followed by a long trill and the final note of a musical phrase (I call this Mozart's trademark). I believe it is hard to find sadness in Mozart- He is usually cheerful or dramatic, even calm. There is a serenade in B flat that is totally removed from the classical period, I think it is a prelude to the begining of the romantic era.
     There is much to enjoy from both of these composers, not limited to piano works.
     Even though they wrote music hundred of years ago, we should not let the thought that they are distant in time catch us. They had one main objective: communicate feelings- religious, romantic, cheerful, etc. And we as humans will, no matter when, get this musical message one way or the other. 

[steveie986]

I am, of course, a huge fan of Glenn Gould, but I think his recordings of the complete Mozart sonatas are farcical at best and abysmal at worst. Does anyone else agree?

[elevateme]

play late at night and appreciate all the brilliant harmony

[bennom]

I am, of course, a huge fan of Glenn Gould, but I think his recordings of the complete Mozart sonatas are farcical at best and abysmal at worst. Does anyone else agree?

I agree, but that doesn't count really... I was a huge fan of gould years ago, but now, even his Bach provokes me. I find it superficial, experimental just for the sake of it. But hopefully I will come back to gould with new, fresh ears later in my life, who knows. I just find the "worship" of Gould-the-Bach-god unhealthy. And health is everything...!

[mike_lang]

If you can find one, I recommend a recording of Emile Naoumoff playing any Bach.

[steveie986]

I agree, but that doesn't count really... I was a huge fan of gould years ago, but now, even his Bach provokes me. I find it superficial, experimental just for the sake of it. But hopefully I will come back to gould with new, fresh ears later in my life, who knows. I just find the "worship" of Gould-the-Bach-god unhealthy. And health is everything...!

That's fascinating. Can you explain why you feel worship of Gould can be unhealthy and what made you turn away from him?

[bennom]

That's fascinating. Can you explain why you feel worship of Gould can be unhealthy and what made you turn away from him?

I stopped listening to his recordings when I started my academic studies, probably due to "over-listening". Then, I started to notice his "impact" on my fellow students. They wanted to play like gould, you know, with his typical dryness, separated notes, and extreme rythmical precision. When they (and I) tried to imitate him, we missed the most essential part, the singing. When gould himself plays, it's like all of the voices have their own line of phrase. But, when people imitate his "style" they focus on the external matters, as mentioned. And, if you're really into getting the multiple voices to sing, his recipe is the least effective, it's counter-effective in fact. Because he was a genius and a freak , the laws of nature didn't have any impact on him. He could make a four part fugue sing and dance, even if he played every note staccatissimo and used an extremely slow or fast tempo. It's fascinating to listen to, but devastating to follow.

In my opinion.

BennoM

[steveie986]

I stopped listening to his recordings when I started my academic studies, probably due to "over-listening". Then, I started to notice his "impact" on my fellow students. They wanted to play like gould, you know, with his typical dryness, separated notes, and extreme rythmical precision. When they (and I) tried to imitate him, we missed the most essential part, the singing. When gould himself plays, it's like all of the voices have their own line of phrase. But, when people imitate his "style" they focus on the external matters, as mentioned. And, if you're really into getting the multiple voices to sing, his recipe is the least effective, it's counter-effective in fact. Because he was a genius and a freak , the laws of nature didn't have any impact on him. He could make a four part fugue sing and dance, even if he played every note staccatissimo and used an extremely slow or fast tempo. It's fascinating to listen to, but devastating to follow.

In my opinion.

BennoM

Great post, Bennom. This was quite insightful. I'll ruminate on it some more.

[contrapunctus]

I am, of course, a huge fan of Glenn Gould, but I think his recordings of the complete Mozart sonatas are farcical at best and abysmal at worst. Does anyone else agree?

They sound that way because they were meant to sound that way.

Gould recorded the Mozart Sonatas for the exact purpose to show how bad they are (this is the reason Gould gave for recording them).

[bennom]

Gould recorded the Mozart Sonatas for the exact purpose to show how bad they are (this is the reason Gould gave for recording them).

...and that really shows what a great artist gould is!

[nervous_wreck]

i can't find it now, but i read on one of these replie's that someone said that mozart is for the most part happy. i can't really pull that off, it's completely opposite of my personality and i think this is the big problem that i'm having. anyone have an answer for this?

[bennom]

i can't find it now, but i read on one of these replie's that someone said that mozart is for the most part happy. i can't really pull that off, it's completely opposite of my personality and i think this is the big problem that i'm having. anyone have an answer for this?

Why don't you start out then with some sad Mozart? D minor and C minor concertos. 
From the sad Mozart you will learn to love the happy Amadeus.

[rc]

i can't find it now, but i read on one of these replie's that someone said that mozart is for the most part happy. i can't really pull that off, it's completely opposite of my personality and i think this is the big problem that i'm having. anyone have an answer for this?

True, Mozart tends to be on the lighter side, but his music certainly has its drama. It's just not always right off the bat, you usually have to wait until later in the movement to get the more intense bits.

That's a part of the classical aesthetic, is they like to have the music build in intensity towards a climax, so in order for better contrast they would start on the more mild side. If you can come to enjoy the softer bits, the intense parts will seem that much more intense by contrast.

[Ruro]

If you can come to enjoy the softer bits, the intense parts will seem that much more intense by contrast.

I believe this to work vice versa as well, the best example I can typically think of is Rachmaninoff's Third Concerto. Focusing greatly on the first movement before the Climax, makes the finale extremely thrilling, and makes me tense and everything! It that's climatic O_o But the second movement is very welcoming, which has an absolutely beautiful melody, very calm... and totaly works as an "aftermath" if you like.

[rc]

I believe this to work vice versa as well, the best example I can typically think of is Rachmaninoff's Third Concerto. Focusing greatly on the first movement before the Climax, makes the finale extremely thrilling, and makes me tense and everything! It that's climatic O_o But the second movement is very welcoming, which has an absolutely beautiful melody, very calm... and totaly works as an "aftermath" if you like.

Yes!

The large-scale contrast between movements, taking the listener on an emotional journey. As opposed to shorter character pieces, like a prelude. Large scale works need that contrast to sustain interest. I like when you can find unity imbedded in the contrast, like how each movement of Beethovens 5th contains the same rhythmic theme but still can have a completely different feel.