Board index › Topical Discussion › Art, Writing, and Music

BWV 1056 Largo is...

Page 2 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Previous topic | Next topic

decoder
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 137
Location: Turkey

10 Jul 2010, 8:58 am

Free-Hinter-System wrote:

I don't consider the Passacaglia a particularly great work either. That was written before Bach had developed a really strong contrapuntal technique, and really that's the most important thing in music. I don't agree that musical quality and complexity are separate, and short pieces can be very complex (look at all the fugues - often one to three minutes in length). I think that "complexity" is necessary on a very basic aesthetical level (and by complexity I really just mean control, everything in the piece must be utterly deliberate, although I mean this specifically, because in order for music to be interesting counterpoint is necessary).

I am not saying that those works (Passacaglia and Fugue, BWV 1056) are not enjoyable, because, like most of Bach, they definitely are. They just don't compare with some of his later music, quite simply the best the world has seen.


Hmm.. I know the countrapuntal concept. And I see it very clear in Bach's many pieces. But maybe I wrote too carelessly, I think complexity is only one dimension of musical beauty. I dont know the timeline of his pieces, but thinking that he always sought for musical beauty in his works, he wouldnt care to compose peices like this Largo, Chaconne, some of his simpler vocal works (e.g. erbarme dich of Mattheaus Passion) if he had thought that complexity was a necessity. And these "simpler" pieces are very beautiful as well, to majority at least. When roughly looked at his works, one apperant thing is diversity. He was a very creative man and was able to reach to the beauty in many different syles and forms.



Free-Hinter-System
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 167

12 Jul 2010, 10:59 am

decoder wrote:
Free-Hinter-System wrote:

I don't consider the Passacaglia a particularly great work either. That was written before Bach had developed a really strong contrapuntal technique, and really that's the most important thing in music. I don't agree that musical quality and complexity are separate, and short pieces can be very complex (look at all the fugues - often one to three minutes in length). I think that "complexity" is necessary on a very basic aesthetical level (and by complexity I really just mean control, everything in the piece must be utterly deliberate, although I mean this specifically, because in order for music to be interesting counterpoint is necessary).

I am not saying that those works (Passacaglia and Fugue, BWV 1056) are not enjoyable, because, like most of Bach, they definitely are. They just don't compare with some of his later music, quite simply the best the world has seen.


Hmm.. I know the countrapuntal concept. And I see it very clear in Bach's many pieces. But maybe I wrote too carelessly, I think complexity is only one dimension of musical beauty. I dont know the timeline of his pieces, but thinking that he always sought for musical beauty in his works, he wouldnt care to compose peices like this Largo, Chaconne, some of his simpler vocal works (e.g. erbarme dich of Mattheaus Passion) if he had thought that complexity was a necessity. And these "simpler" pieces are very beautiful as well, to majority at least. When roughly looked at his works, one apperant thing is diversity. He was a very creative man and was able to reach to the beauty in many different syles and forms.


All of the beauty in Bach's music is borne of counterpoint, I think. Certainly all of the great moments are contrapuntal. And this is the real value in music -- making everything fit. The Passacaglia and Fugue is much too abstract for its style, really the work of a talented amateur. The polyphony works a bit better than Mozart could have done it, but it is very far from a true Bachian fugue. In fact BWV 1056 fares much better; particularly the last movement. But you're ignoring the fact that this concerto does in fact utilize counterpoint, sometimes quite impressively, just not quite to the degree that Bach reached in other pieces.

I don't think music has to be "complex" to be great, but I don't think either that counterpoint equals complexity. Instead I think that it is absolutely essential in good music, although very difficult to write well.

Sorry if it seems like I'm talking in circles, because it feels that way to me. It's not really an intellectual position of mine, its just my taste in music.



decoder
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 137
Location: Turkey

12 Jul 2010, 2:25 pm

Free-Hinter-System wrote:
decoder wrote:

Hmm.. I know the countrapuntal concept. And I see it very clear in Bach's many pieces. But maybe I wrote too carelessly, I think complexity is only one dimension of musical beauty. I dont know the timeline of his pieces, but thinking that he always sought for musical beauty in his works, he wouldnt care to compose peices like this Largo, Chaconne, some of his simpler vocal works (e.g. erbarme dich of Mattheaus Passion) if he had thought that complexity was a necessity. And these "simpler" pieces are very beautiful as well, to majority at least. When roughly looked at his works, one apperant thing is diversity. He was a very creative man and was able to reach to the beauty in many different syles and forms.


All of the beauty in Bach's music is borne of counterpoint, I think. Certainly all of the great moments are contrapuntal. And this is the real value in music -- making everything fit. The Passacaglia and Fugue is much too abstract for its style, really the work of a talented amateur. The polyphony works a bit better than Mozart could have done it, but it is very far from a true Bachian fugue. In fact BWV 1056 fares much better; particularly the last movement. But you're ignoring the fact that this concerto does in fact utilize counterpoint, sometimes quite impressively, just not quite to the degree that Bach reached in other pieces.

I don't think music has to be "complex" to be great, but I don't think either that counterpoint equals complexity. Instead I think that it is absolutely essential in good music, although very difficult to write well.

Sorry if it seems like I'm talking in circles, because it feels that way to me. It's not really an intellectual position of mine, its just my taste in music.



Hmm no, talking in circles indicate that you are sure of your opinion, the opinion is worth more attention.

You might be right. However it is a little abstract subject, even in Bach's case. And devouring Bach is something I have yet to do. You seem like you know alot about his music, and careful about it too. Can I ask which works of him do you consider as best examples of counterpoint?



Free-Hinter-System
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 167

13 Jul 2010, 9:06 am

decoder wrote:
Free-Hinter-System wrote:
decoder wrote:

Hmm.. I know the countrapuntal concept. And I see it very clear in Bach's many pieces. But maybe I wrote too carelessly, I think complexity is only one dimension of musical beauty. I dont know the timeline of his pieces, but thinking that he always sought for musical beauty in his works, he wouldnt care to compose peices like this Largo, Chaconne, some of his simpler vocal works (e.g. erbarme dich of Mattheaus Passion) if he had thought that complexity was a necessity. And these "simpler" pieces are very beautiful as well, to majority at least. When roughly looked at his works, one apperant thing is diversity. He was a very creative man and was able to reach to the beauty in many different syles and forms.


All of the beauty in Bach's music is borne of counterpoint, I think. Certainly all of the great moments are contrapuntal. And this is the real value in music -- making everything fit. The Passacaglia and Fugue is much too abstract for its style, really the work of a talented amateur. The polyphony works a bit better than Mozart could have done it, but it is very far from a true Bachian fugue. In fact BWV 1056 fares much better; particularly the last movement. But you're ignoring the fact that this concerto does in fact utilize counterpoint, sometimes quite impressively, just not quite to the degree that Bach reached in other pieces.

I don't think music has to be "complex" to be great, but I don't think either that counterpoint equals complexity. Instead I think that it is absolutely essential in good music, although very difficult to write well.

Sorry if it seems like I'm talking in circles, because it feels that way to me. It's not really an intellectual position of mine, its just my taste in music.



Hmm no, talking in circles indicate that you are sure of your opinion, the opinion is worth more attention.

You might be right. However it is a little abstract subject, even in Bach's case. And devouring Bach is something I have yet to do. You seem like you know alot about his music, and careful about it too. Can I ask which works of him do you consider as best examples of counterpoint?


It might take me a while to write a list, as my mouse isn't working and references, examples will be difficult to allocate. I'll PM you with something good :).