Favorite Symphonies Thread

File: Joseph_Haydn-1600x900-c-default.jpg (213KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1600x900px

>>68664161
Haydn 13
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW9RrOLoYE0
Haydn 104
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aR73zpX4BI&t=767s
Haydn 103
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94_p5wTkx8w&t=9s

Martinů 1, 4
Schnittke 1, 2
Auerbach 1
Haydn 104
Mahler 5
Pärt 1

File: saintsaens.jpg (78KB, 459x600px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 459x600px

>>68664161
Saint-Saëns 3
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2wNAWBPFiI
Tchaikovsky 5
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2JBT0HC98I
Berlioz Fantastique
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2Kky5BC9Uk

>>68664161
Beethoven 5
Tchaikovsky 1
Weill 2
Haydn 8

All 4 of Brahms are some of my favorite pieces of music, I particularly like this recording of 4:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LY2BJYBw7TM

I like most of Bruckner, particularly #3 but here is great 7 and 8:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X2bbusaOzI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asJf3KmAg08


Obvious you know Beethovens greats, all, here is 6:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2VY33VXnrQ


Sieblius 1 and 2,(and more not posted)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnZUayjPpo0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu0Y2FyHfxM


Mozart many, 40 and 41

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzBwa2jI1Oc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pijC8wU6sDA

>>68666694
I can never get into Brahms, it's just so dissonant and messy to me, maybe too complicated for me, idk but nothing from his pieces ever "stick" with me, it's all just arbitrary noise.

>>68667042
Did you listen to that entire symphony posted? Listen to all 4 of his symphonies.

Here is more pieces I really like by Brahms:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BWOHlEyHcs


I think his music is first of all, always entertaining, aesthetically, linearly, motifs and ideas are usually inspired and creative, covers a broad range of emotions, spiritual powers, great fulfillment of all types of styles from adagios (slow romantic, longing, soulful, dramatic, refined, elegant, transcendent) to bombastic triumphant 'horny' marches and manifest fury.

The pieces I mentioned, his symphonies, but I linked above 4th, I mean its just a wise spiritual journey, it is like many masterful paintings/a novel/a genius diary, but of course, beyond words. The images that can come to mind.

The harmonic beauty and textures, the layers and complexity of sound and how they fit together and develop linearly, and build cyclically. masterful craftsmanship.

You can find catchy tunes that are hummable, in some of his pieces, symphony 2, symphony 4, symphony 3, probably symphony 1 too, lol, and the 1st sextet posted above has a few.

But its really just the beauty of the math, geometry, harmony of musical ideas, and energy behind the spirit of creation and invention, the lushness of sound, the mystery, and surprise and impressiveness of where he starts and where he was able to think to take the listener.

I dont know what you do like.

If its all just arbitrary noise to you, then I can only think that you do not concentrate listening closely enough. I have probably listened to symphony 4 over a 100 times. The others around 50 or more. Usually when i first come across a piece of music that is really attractive to me, I listen very closely and dont do anything else, but just listen. And then when I finally know it all and know it well, then I feel comfortable to do something else like browse online while listening or something.

>>68667042
Maybe you strictly prefer the classical sense, and brahms is too romantic, too slurry and wavy and curvy free wheelin, I mean he pretty much is like classisct but very organic like lghtening or roots of trees like spreading out, not always so stiff and in a steady beat of time, sometimes I guess, not so much as if his composition is a sterile mechanism that (I guess what I mean, his music has a lot of humanity, human spirit) is a perfectly balanced mathematical like some other classicalists may be, which I am now assuming, you are potentially comparing him to such, and him being 'messy' is him being romantic comparatively.

As what is not messy, is like mozart or hayden, and beethoven in some senses, where everything is clean cut and in order, relatively, they do have their moments of letting it all out so to speak, and in their cases of that style music, it is almost as if the music is beyond the human spirit, it is like a marble sculpture, where you can enjoy the beauty of the art without necessarily thinking to much about the spirit of the artist, or a very well made cabinet with innumerable artistic notches and details, like the perfect orders latent in math and geometry are plucked by the composer, as if the pieces of music were universally obvious, due to their symmetries and concrete (not messy) organization),

Whereas brahms, is more... and this is all just what I think, as you may say, messy, more longing, more about the spiritual quest of man, like the music is brahms speaking, moreso than a piece of music that is suppose to depict a place or thing, or setting music, or background music... I mean, mozart and others guess, did think of voices of music, and how do people listen to music, what do they think about, do they imagine the lines as people singing, or view sections as a whole reminds of the city or forrest, or childhood, or this musical phrase and voice is a call and answer and you can imagine them being the desires of individuals

>>68667381
I guess what it comes down to is partly the art is subjective thing, the artist makes the art, the observer observes the art, and they each bring something to the table. Of course if I just paint a single black line on canvas, there is only so much that can generally invoke in an observer, if I paint "the school of athens) there is a bit more potentially (arguably) that could be invoked,

But further more, how much could either of these things mean to a toddler? The observer of art and their nature is required, or, it is just so, that what they bring with them and of them, their experiences and mental abilities and imagination and inclination, determine ultimately (along with the art) what the art can possibly mean to them.

First and foremost, Brahms, and that first sextet is a great example, the 2nd movement is epic, the 1st 30 seconds of the 1st movement is exquisitely sublime and genius, the complexity and layering; first and foremost, Brahms to me seeks, and to me definitely succeeds at portraying, aesthetic, harmonic beauty. certainly not as perfectly beautiful as others, but for me, his pieces of music can inspire the human soul in ways, and his compositions that I enjoy contain a unique and beautiful complexity that I have not experienced in others, which of course is why he has been celebrated throughout history since his time by many. And I can say I understand why, and am one of them.

File: What the fuck is this.png (34KB, 191x106px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 191x106px

>>68667042
>Brahms
>dissonant
>messy
what-what -what?

>>68667292
>>68667381
>>68667437
not him and I'll read this later but I want to say that I appreciate you for posting these massive walls of text about something you're deeply passionate about. I wish I was this dedicated

Anyway my favorite symphony is Schumann's 4th because cyclical symphonies are the fucking shit and he does something more than just "repeat theme 1 in all 4 movements." He actually creates a quasi-exposition in the 1st movement's development and withholds recapitulation of the development's "first theme" until the 4th movement. Meanwhile, the introduction of the 1st movement is put under a series of variations in the inner two movements and anyway I think it's absolutely magical.

Here's some symphonies that I think are underrated mostly because they fall under the category of "gross icky concert band music". Highly recommended to anyone who likes Hindemith and things that sound like Hindemith.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyq-3vYxW88
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjocQ4SQuVQ