Rob Baldwin wrote:

>Like Ian Foster, I, too, am flabberghasted that so many on this
>list dislike Brahms' symphonies--C'mon, there's a lot about the Mahler
>symphonies that "off-put" me but I would never say I dislike them!  "De
>gustibus non est disputandum"--"There's no disputing tastes"--but at least
>people on this list should recognize good, solid, musical craftsmanship!
>For me, Brahms perfectly wedded a craftsmanship and architecture equal (or
>at least close) to that of J.S.  Bach, but enriched by his own, unique,
>soaring ecstacies.

I would never say that I "dislike" the Brahms 4.  But I find that I easily
tire of them, or burn out, if I hear them more often than, say, a few
months.  For a long time, I had burned out on the Beethoven 9 to the point
that I could not bear them, but fortunately I recovered from that condition
and now listen to them frequently.  I don't know whether I will ever
recuperate in the same way vis-a-vis the Brahms set.

No question that they are full of "good, solid, musical craftsmanship," but
to my mind, good, solid craftsmanship is a virtue of furniture, not music.
The Brahms symphonies strike me as a great set of pieces to sit on and eat
dinner off of (metaphorically speaking), but on the whole (except for a few
passages here and there) I don't sense the sheer, fiery brilliance that
brought me back to LvB.

But the first rule of music, and all other arts, is that it's all in the
eye, or ear, of the beholder. So if others are happy with the Brahms
symphonies, I'm happy for them.

Jon Johanning // [log in to unmask]