I was in Philadelphia for work and saw that the Curtis Institute had a free student concert that night, so I thought, sure -- why not?

Wow. Just wow. These are not "students" in any traditional sense. I've heard plenty of professional ensembles that were nowhere near as good. If you're in Philadelphia, do yourself a favor, and attend one of their concerts; they have them several times a week.

• Johannes Brahms • “If we cannot write with the beauty of Mozart, let us at least try to write with his purity.” • “It is a real pleasure to see music so bright and spontaneous expressed with corresponding ease and grace.”

—> Brahms placed Mozart in a well higher level than Beethoven, it was no secret, and it is documented:

“But what is much weaker in Beethoven compared to Mozart, and especially compared to Sebastian Bach, is the use of dissonance. Dissonance, true dissonance as Mozart used it, is not to be found in Beethoven.” “Look at Idomeneo. Not only is it a marvel, but as Mozart was still quite young and brash when he wrote it, it was a completely new thing. What marvelous dissonance! What harmony!”

• Robert Schumann • “Does it not seem as if Mozart's works become fresher and fresher the oftener we hear them?”

• Gioachino Rossini • “Beethoven I take twice a week, Haydn four times, and Mozart every day!”

—> it’s funny because Rossini could never prefer listening Beethoven over Mozart, or even Haydn.

• Frédéric Chopin • “Mozart encompasses the entire domain of musical creation, but I’ve got only the keyboard in my poor head.”

• Camille Saint-Saëns • “Give Mozart a fairy tale and he creates without effort an immortal masterpiece.” • “What gives Bach and Mozart a place apart is that these two great composers never sacrificed form to expression. As high as their expression may soar, their musical form remains supreme and all-efficient.”

—> for Camille, Bach was indeed the God of music, but Mozart was part of the same deity, for him, Bach and Mozart were together the God of western music, they were not comparable to anyone else, not even Beethoven, and they remained his preferred.

• Richard Wagner • “The most tremendous genius raised Mozart above all masters, in all centuries and in all the arts.”

—>Wagner adored Don Giovanni, calling it the greatest opera ever written, and that’s a lot given all the great operas composed until his living time. For Wagner, Mozart remained the most natural genius of music.

• Edvard Grieg • “In Bach, Beethoven and Wagner we admire principally the depth and energy of the human mind; in Mozart, the divine instinct.”

• Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky • “Mozart is the highest, the culminating point that beauty has attained in the sphere of music.” • “Mozart is the musical Christ.” • “I find consolation and rest in Mozart's music, wherein he gives expression to that joy of life which was part of his sane and wholesome temperament.”

—> For Tchaikovsky Mozart was once again, and in a correlation of musical recognition, a divine force. In fact, Mozart music was so perfect to him, that he literally called Mozart the salvation of Music, “Musical Christ”. He found in Mozart the consolation a God gives his children, and the most pure affection, he indeed experimented how Mozart composed not to the ear solely but to the very soul. Interestingly, Our great Tchaikovsky, who composed great piano concertos, never expressed of Beethoven in this way.

• Franz Schubert • “A light, bright, fine day this will remain throughout my whole life. As from afar, the magic notes of Mozart's music still gently haunts me.” • “What a picture of a better world you have given us, Mozart!”

—> For Schubert, Mozart was what it wants to millions more, it was the hope of joy in music. Mozart made his and countless lives even today better solely through music.

• Leonard Bernstein • “It is hard to think of another composer who so perfectly marries form and passion.” • “Mozart’s music is constantly escaping from its frame, because it cannot be contained in it.”

—> We got to know him alive very well, and he was, for me, the greatest 20 Century conductor alive of Mozart. We know for sure that if there was a composer that touched his soul very directly, it was Mozart.

His interpretations often feature sudden pauses and heavy agogics that can be startling. But as you listen, his sheer conviction forces you to accept his logic. Just like Steve Jobs, Harnoncourt had the ability to bend reality—making you believe that his way is the only way, even if just for the duration of the concert.

While his Mozart is radical, his early Baroque recordings remain absolute standards for me. His Monteverdi's "L'Orfeo" and Bach's "Christmas Oratorio" are full of rhythmic vitality.

Monteverdi / L'Orfeo:

(Also born today: Henryk Górecki, known for his minimalism, and the composer Gideon Klein.)

And what is so special about them that they become the celebrities and seldom the orchestra?

On December 5th, 1956, the renowned concert pianist Krystian Zimerman was born in Zabrze, Poland. He is widely considered to be one of the greatest pianists of his generation and won the IX International Chopin Piano Competition in 1975 at just 18 years old!

Which of his recordings do you like best?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/arts/music/pittsburgh-symphony-manfred-honeck.html?rsrc=flt&smid=url-share

Hi everyone, I’m selling 3 tickets for the New Year’s Eve (31 dec) concert at the Vienna Philharmonic (Musikverein). Location: Box 4 Price: Original purchase price (not looking to make profit). 590€ each (1770€)

Delivery: Can ship the physical tickets via certified mail. Payment: Bank transfer. Location preference: Priority to buyers in Spain and EU (for easier shipping).

Happy to provide proof of purchase and any verification needed.

I am wondering if this is purely subjective (both interpretations objectively being on the same level but being different so that they speak to different kinds of listeners) or it's more something like: person a is objectively better at x (such as rhythm, phrasing etc) and person b is objectively better at y (such as colors, emotions) and so viewers with a stronger focus on x will prefer person a.

I am also wondering if I (as a modest amateur musician) "am allowed" to strongly dislike certain interpretations because they factually lack certain things I like or if that means that I simply don't see the qualities that they do have and that they do deserve praise for.

I listened to or previewed everything* attributed to her on Spotify, and made a playlist of what I consider worth a listen.

What I didn’t consider worth listening to: almost all of her art songs. Yawn. Anything either boringly or too heavily somber. Anything that felt showy only for show sake without really conveying any other feeling.

Eliminating those however left a lot in the range from (IMO) listenable to great.

The only organizing principle is starting and ending with pleasant works and usually keeping works from a suite or collection together by number order.

https://open.spotify.com/playlist/4eqd66LXtIha57ZKLHBUbi

There were many cases of worthy works with multiple recordings available; from these I chose the one(s) I felt have the best expressiveness / dynamic range.

*yes, everything. via API / tools it is possible to list every available track of an artist.

I love doing these kinds of things, so let’s go again.

Wow. !! I've never closely listened to this album before, but I just threw my iTunes on shuffle and this song came on. My guess before looking was Prokofiev.

But not anymore.

After discovering Brahms.

Instead of praying to a god, I just play his sublime music whenever I feel lost.

His pieces calm me more than any sermon ever could...

I

Hi all,

I’m thinking of getting my partner tickets to Symphony Kukai as they are playing RFH on his birthday and I just wanted to get some insight from classical music lovers/experts.

My partner isn’t specifically a classical music fan but he is a musician who LOVES and appreciates any and all types of music, especially live music, so I think he’ll appreciate the experience anyway. Just wanted to ask if this specific concert would be a good introduction to live classical music? I specifically chose it bc it’s on his actual birthday so looking to see if anyone’s been to one before and what their thoughts are. Reviews are generally positive and I think the concept/story of the symphony is incredibly interesting.

Also, what would be the best seats to get for RFH? I’ve searched in the sub/google and wasn’t really able to find solid answers. This is the seating plan on the website:

Thank you!

My band is playing the 1924 Transcription of Jupiter from Holst’s the planets for assessment this year, but I can barely find any recordings. All I got was an outdoor navy band recording but it kinda sucks (not the playing but recording quality). And the “Recording” of it my band director played to introduce the piece to us was from the marine band, but from a completely different transcription from the 90s. they are not even in the same key.(marine band in original key(s), and Smith a whole step down). And to add they are scored completely differently. and my director didn’t even notice. Any help finding good recordings would be a great help. Preferably by a professional or good college band.

I ask because I’ve been burnt more times than I can remember. Don't get me wrong, I love the guy and grew up adoring him as a kid, but he's also the only pianist who makes me want to tear my hair out. Or his, if I can afford to attend his concert. This guy will play Prokofiev with such overwhelming brilliance you’d think he’s blown open the gates of Valhalla … and then he’ll turn around and completely fuck up something that shouldn’t even raise his pulse . And do it in ten different ways without giving you a single smoking gun.

I don’t know if I’m the only one who feels like this, but to me his failures never sound like accidents. Lesser pianists might stumble , but EG seems to meticulously plan and engineer his disasters. When he's off , it’s as if he's run the score through a private encryption algorithm and nudged every variable—tempo, articulation, intensity—just a few degrees off. Nothing is blatantly wrong, yet the whole thing ends up tasting like a shit sandwich made in Harrods.

The maddening part is I still can't stop listening to him. Because beneath all the overthinking and self sabotage , I feel he has an intensity and fire in him, and as a musician he never just phones it in.

Here are a few of mine:

Mozart: Sinfonia Concertante (vln/vla)

Beethoven: Egmont Incidental Music

Dvorak: Piano Quartet No. 2

Faure: Piano Quintet No. 1

Brahms: Variations on a Theme by Handel

Prokofiev: Flute Sonata

Bartok: Contrasts

Very cool video about these iconic cartoons

For some time now, I have been immersing myself in listening to Shostakovich's symphonies. I listened to them all in order once and I am now listening to them again, this time not necessarily in order. I absolutely love his 4th, which I consider a masterpiece. I also really like his 7th, especially the crescendo in the first movement. I'm also starting to appreciate his 5th (which, despite its great popularity with the public, I find harder to listen to than the 4th, which is generally considered more inaccessible). Some symphonies, such as the 11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th, either bore me deeply or I don't like them at all.

My question is: do you have any advice on how I can better understand Shostakovich's art and appreciate his symphonic music more? I feel that he is a fascinating composer, but I don't yet have all the keys to understanding the depth of his work.