Liszt piano works.....

[fermata_88]

why is it that some of Liszt's piano works are based on music by other composers?

[gyzzzmo]

Because that's what Liszt did alot in his time, and what was popular to do. He was a master in playing variations on popular themes, but he also took the time to write them down

gyzzz

[thalbergmad]

why is it that some of Liszt's piano works are based on music by other composers?

Because he could not think of anything decent himself.

I love Liszt, but i feel he was far superior as a transcriber rather than a composer.

Thal

[ahinton]

Because he could not think of anything decent himself.

I love Liszt, but i feel he was far superior as a transcriber rather than a composer.

I too love Liszt - indeed it would surely be impossible to imagine the world of music without him - but for all that he was indeed an immensely great, sensitive and imaginative transcriber, there was a whole lot more to his writing than just that; what of the sonata, the various volumes of Années de pèlerinage, the Transcendental Studies, the Faust Symphony and the tone poems? (and much more besides, of course, but these are just picked at random for starters)...

Best,

Alistair

[richard black]

I love Liszt, but i feel he was far superior as a transcriber rather than a composer.

I couldn't agree less! Well, I agree he was a fine transcriber, but I find lots of originality in his compositions. Indeed, I would go so far as to put him on a par with Berlioz as one of the most original musical minds of the 19th century. I believe he was a much bigger influence on Wagner than most people realise (or than Wagner himself would ever have admitted), and an astonishing number of Wagner's 'innovations' turn up in earlier works of Liszt.

Incidentally, for the OP, it's worth bearing in mind that an extraordinary array of great musical works are 'based on' (in different ways) pre-existing musical works or ideas. E.g. great chunks of Bach (Lutheran chorales), sets of variations by everyone from Giles Farnaby to composers still living, by way of Beethoven, Brahms, Grieg, Schumann..... and so on.

[general disarray]

I couldn't agree less! Well, I agree he was a fine transcriber, but I find lots of originality in his compositions. Indeed, I would go so far as to put him on a par with Berlioz as one of the most original musical minds of the 19th century. I believe he was a much bigger influence on Wagner than most people realise (or than Wagner himself would ever have admitted), and an astonishing number of Wagner's 'innovations' turn up in earlier works of Liszt.

Incidentally, for the OP, it's worth bearing in mind that an extraordinary array of great musical works are 'based on' (in different ways) pre-existing musical works or ideas. E.g. great chunks of Bach (Lutheran chorales), sets of variations by everyone from Giles Farnaby to composers still living, by way of Beethoven, Brahms, Grieg, Schumann..... and so on.

This entire post bears repeating. 

Liszt was a seminal influence on all 19th-century composers.  Certainly Wagner and most definitely Berlioz.  The stage in Germany -- where it was essential in those days for composers to have success -- was handed over by Liszt to Berlioz, along with this best advice for the production of "Benvenuto Cellini."  In addition to being the paterfamilias of the full-blown Romantic movement (and the so-called Modern to follow), he was a generous and good man.  His support of other composers is legendary.

You should be on your knees to Liszt.  Among other things, he gave the piano a real diva's voice.  He made the piano a star player.  Which, of course, pianists deserve.   

(And yes, Richard, we do indeed all strive to be singers.  At least we should.  The best instrumentalists always have this aspiration.) 

[ahinton]

This entire post bears repeating. 

Liszt was a seminal influence on all 19th-century composers.  Certainly Wagner and most definitely Berlioz.  The stage in Germany -- where it was essential in those days for composers to have success -- was handed over by Liszt to Berlioz, along with this best advice for the production of "Benvenuto Cellini."  In addition to being the paterfamilias of the full-blown Romantic movement (and the so-called Modern to follow), he was a generous and good man.  His support of other composers is legendary.

You should be on your knees to Liszt.  Among other things, he gave the piano a real diva's voice.  He made the piano a star player.  Which, of course, pianists deserve.   

(And yes, Richard, we do indeed all strive to be singers.  At least we should.  The best instrumentalists always have this aspiration.) 

LOUD CHEERS! (as Sorabji would have said - especially in the present context, methinks)...

Best,

Alistair

[pianowolfi]

Also many of Bach's works are based on music by other composers, Vivaldi for instance. He studied all significant composers in his time to learn and "absorb their beings" .Copying, quoting and transcribing was quite common at his time.

[Kassaa]

Also many of Bach's works are based on music by other composers, Vivaldi for instance. He studied all significant composers in his time to learn and "absorb their beings" .Copying, quoting and transcribing was quite common at his time.

And he walked for three weeks just to hear Buxtehude playing the organ!

[ahinton]

Also many of Bach's works are based on music by other composers, Vivaldi for instance. He studied all significant composers in his time to learn and "absorb their beings" .Copying, quoting and transcribing was quite common at his time.

Richard Black had already implied as much. Not only that, but we all write the same notes, so there is bound to be all manner of cross-fertilisation, whether or not it be couched in such clear terms as might be expected of an actual conscious transcription.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I too love Liszt - indeed it would surely be impossible to imagine the world of music without him - but for all that he was indeed an immensely great, sensitive and imaginative transcriber, there was a whole lot more to his writing than just that; what of the sonata, the various volumes of Années de pèlerinage, the Transcendental Studies, the Faust Symphony and the tone poems? (and much more besides, of course, but these are just picked at random for starters)...

The sonata does nothing for me at all and nor do the tone poems and i base my judgement on listening to the complete series of Liszt recordings (which admittedly are not all good).

For me, Liszt was better at tinkering with other composers themes as opposed to making his own, but that is my personal opinion and i respect those who think differently.

So as Sorabji once said (bugger off and irritate someone else).

Thal

[ahinton]

The sonata does nothing for me at all and nor do the tone poems and i base my judgement on listening to the complete series of Liszt recordings (which admittedly are not all good).

Well, that's up to you and it appears to be your opionion to which you are, of course, entitled, but let's not forget that this is precisely what it is, no more and no less - an opinion, as distinct from any kind of value-judgement.

For me, Liszt was better at tinkering with other composers themes as opposed to making his own, but that is my personal opinion and i respect those who think differently.

As above - and your sensible caveat is as welcome as it is necessary, although I must still counter your claim that Liszt merely "tinkered" with the works of others, a suggestion that sits not at all well even with your own remarks in which you openly and overtly value Liszt as a great transcriber.

So as Sorabji once said (bugger off and irritate someone else).

And the source of this alleged quotation is...?...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

but let's not forget that this is precisely what it is, no more and no less - an opinion, as distinct from any kind of value-judgement.

Yes, but that is what yours is as well, just an opinion.

However learned.

Thal

[ahinton]

Yes, but that is what yours is as well, just an opinion.

However learned.

No, Thal; re-read my post and you will note that I merely commented on your opinion without actually offering one of my own; if I were to offer one, it would admittedly conflict with yours and the fact that it might be shared by the majority of people who have any interest whatsoever in Liszt does not of itself make it "correct", but what do you have against Liszt's sonata? It would be more interesting to hear about that from you.

Best,

Alistair