Talk:Symphony No. 4 (Brahms)

	Classical music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles
	This article is supported by Compositions task force.

Chaconne or Passacaglia

Both the chaconne and passacaglia articles 'claim' the final movement as one. The article says it's the later with Brahms claiming the former...but I've always read it as being a chaconne, and it seems to fit that better (chord prograssion vs bass line). ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 12:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the article to say that it is a chaconne, but there are references to it as a passacaglia, such as the programme notes linked to.

--Atavi 17:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Argument for it being a chaconne is the prevailing 3/4 time with the emphasis on the second beat (though this becomes more varied and subtle as the movement progresses). Brahms probably knew the baroque conventions better than any of his contemporary composers. Chaconnes are dances - and big ones - in the stage works of Purcell, Lully, Rameau and others in the French tradition. If that's not enough, Brahms's friend Joachim revived and regularly played Bach's Chaconne from the D minor solo violin sonata in public, and Brahms arranged it for piano for the left hand. Argument against it being a chaconne: Brahms doesn't specify that it is, and he should have known. He doesn't let you know what he's up to in the finale of the Haydn variations either, but it meets all the demands of a strict passacaglia, and the rhythm rules out a chaconne.

Argument for it being a passacaglia - Tovey, who knew Joachim personally, and wrote the programme notes for Steinbach's concerts of the Brahms symphonies in London calls it a passacaglia. Hanslick, who gets many a kicking, but who was there at the first piano performance, in an 1886 review, says "chaconne or passacaglia".

You pays your money and you takes your choice.  I see that since the above it has reverted to being a passacaglia again.  That's probably safer.Delahays (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why do we have separate articles for chaconne and passacaglia in the first place? Synonyms... Schissel | Sound the Note! 21:21, 14 May 2016 (UTC) (or as one of the articles points out, synonyms now, if not originally. Brahms was indeed something of an antiquarian, I know, but attempts to show he used one of the original two and not the other- rather than something maybe somewhat more general/newer still with the ostinato-harmony element intact- seems folly.)[reply]

Description

'Lushly romantic'... is it? not in the version I grew up with ! (On big black vinyl disk - Which alas I can't now find). It's the most gritty of the Brahms symphonies I recollect, tinged with an older man's tragedy. And do either of these descriptions belong in an encyclopeadia used by many people for whom lush (or gritty) is not a word of choice. Bob aka Linuxlad 20:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"His life was coming to an end"?

Brahms lived 12 years after completing this symphony. I cannot access the source for this assertion, but mightn't "he was aging" be a bit more accurate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.231.6.65 (talk) 18:57, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strangely, that's the only statement in the article that's cited or I'd simply remove it. I don't believe it either though. Too often, program-note writers try to assign some sort of valedictory aura to "last" pieces by composers in a genre despite the fact that there's often no evidence that the composer had any idea that the particular piece would be his last.DavidRF (talk) 19:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Movement Keys

Isn't it the second movement that "might also be interpreted as E phrygian", not the third? 66.63.47.220 (talk) 19:16, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a source that backs this up: http://books.google.com/books?id=C7fJ_TJko_wC&pg=PA521&lpg=PA521&dq=brahms+%22e+phrygian%22&source=bl&ots=u4eqUIe23E&sig=-MX1v69gUGYPNJOrblQeG6MXQbQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=zewmT6PQAqPj0QGW14n8CA&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false 66.63.47.220 (talk) 19:19, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, definitely talking about the 2nd movement. we've have templates for longer than your comment existed, btw, but even if we didn't, everything after the lpg=PG521 up there- 6 lines of link- refers to "stuff" mostly, and can be omitted... Schissel | Sound the Note! 21:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

E Phrygian is not a key; it's a scale. Keys are harmonic hierarchies centered on a particular major or minor triad, (usually) following the rules of common practice tonality. The notes of the scale of the same name as a key feature the notes most commonly used in that key, but, especially in minor keys and later 19th century music, the notes were very flexible and could be altered quite freely without changing key at all. To say that "E Phrygian" is a key is bad enough, and somewhat anachronistic, but to use the term "E Phrygian dominant" is even worse, because it's not only not a key, not only extremely anachronistic, it's a term that conflicts entirely with classical understandings of "dominant." 2600:1000:A121:A9DB:B0E1:306D:D6E:5CC (talk) 16:15, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Final Transtional Movement

What strikes me most about the fourth movement of Brahm's 4th Symphony is its continual transitional nature. The entire theme and its variations, transition continually from one variation to the next, seeming to lead the listener to a final ending that never quite comes, but is only grudgingly stated to end his final symphony. Inquirer0 (talk) 00:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]