Dave Stewart:

>Mikael Rasmusson wrote:
>
>>As I said before, I don't think B:s musical material is so well suited for
>>the development he subjects it to.  He's lacking Beethoven's dramatical
>>impact.  And sometimes I just find his musical material boring (middle
>>sections of 2nd and 3rd movements of the Double concerto).
>
>With regards to the orchestration being deficient, would you care to
>justify this? If you are saying that Brahms' orchestration is boring, you
>are incorrect.  If you are saying it is unimaginative, you are incorrect.
>If you are saying it is understated when next to Liszt or Berlioz or
>someone, you are correct.  But I don't think understatement deficiency.

I am perfectly entitled to think that Brahms' orchestration is boring
(occasionally).  Nobody can correct my personal feelings.  If I'm bored,
that's it!

Unimaginative is another question.  That implies that Brahms was lacking
orchestral imagination.  I don't know.  IMHO, he set up too many
restrictions for himself.

Concerning his orchestration: there are too much going in the lower
register.  Things tend to get blurred.  I think that Aaron Rabushka
suggested some improvements (or alterations) one or two years ago.
Adding a piccolo was one of his suggestions....IIRC.

>It seems that you either get Brahms or you don't - no halfway house.
>I couldn't understand the fuss before I had a revelation, but now I am
>here...  I just pity those that aren't.  Everyone should love Brahms.  Only
>bit of Brahms I don't like is the first subject of the third symphony.  It
>irritates me.  My problem of course...

I like some of it, including the first subject of the third symphony...

Mikael
[log in to unmask]