schumann.

[trunks]

I also love Schumann's music, and on top of my list are:
Papillons Op.2
Toccata Op.7
Carnaval Op.9
Fantasiestucke Op.12
Symphonic Etudes Op.13
Kriesleriana Op.16
Fantasia in C Op.17
Arabesque Op.18
Concerto in A minor Op.54

Two problems Schumann had quite in common in his scores that I observed, were
(a) they are awkward and unfriendly to the hands
(b) he used tied notes excessively, rendering his scores horrendously difficult to read

[sophie117]

I totally agree. Schumann is my favourite romantic composer, and I for one would love to see more of it discussed in the forum.

Perhaps one of the reasons he is seldom mentioned is because most of his pieces look and sound very easy abut are actually very difficult to play (a characteristic he shares with Brahms), and the ideal piece as we all know are the ones that look and sound difficult but are actually very easy to play.

I agree. Schumann never wrote a piece that is comfortable for the hands-unlike Chopin or Liszt's, where virtuosity can be a sheer enjoyment once you've got it over. It requires a mind constantly in a state of fantasy and at once capable of calm control and clear memory. And perhaps that's precisely why I love him as a composer. It really can bring an integration of fingers and mind in some best examples.(No.8 of Kreisleriana, op.16 can be a perfect test for the artistry of a pianist. It sounds amazing in Argerich's hands) Some of his intensive dynamics and notes are virtually impossible to execute accurately(same with some of Brahms'), while they can be psychological indications for the performer instead, which I think opens its door to literary writing.
To love Schumann is difficult. You need not only to love the lovable pieces(Traumerei, etc.) but also something he was unable to write out. And his full character indeed covered more than a musican's, which made him IMP the most romantic of the romantics of his time.

[thalbergmad]

To love Schumann is difficult.

Bleeding impossible for some of us.

It must have taken a while to find and reactivate a 6 year old thread.

Thal

[dtao12]

I agree. Schumann never wrote a piece that is comfortable for the hands-unlike Chopin or Liszt's, where virtuosity can be a sheer enjoyment once you've got it over. It requires a mind constantly in a state of fantasy and at once capable of calm control and clear memory. And perhaps that's precisely why I love him as a composer. It really can bring an integration of fingers and mind in some best examples.

I think this quote captures the appeal of Schumann. The word "fantasy" (implying dreaming and imagination) applies to more than just his Fantasy op. 17 (probably my favorite) or other pieces w. "fantasy" in their title. Carnaval for example evokes a fanciful world of personalities and colors. I've played his biggest works, and don't find any of it (except Toccata) as technically difficult as the top end of Chopin and Liszt. His big leaps/stretches and syncopations can be tough. The originality and quirkiness of his rhythms are among the reasons his music appeals to me. His pieces, programmatic or not, are full of tenderness, joy, triumph, and other emotions beautifully expressed.