Talk:Piano Concerto No. 1 (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.

Schumann's death

"Brahms finished the concerto on the third-year anniversary of the death of Clara Schumann, who he was said to be madly in love with."

How could it be possible if Clara died in 1896, and Brahms in 1897? --Leonardo T. de Oliveira 00:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its supposed to be Robert Schumann's death. I inserted a Robert in there to make it a bit more clear (though the whole section could use a rewrite). I'm not quite sure its true though. Robert Schumann died in July 1856 and the concerto premiered in January 1859. DavidRF 03:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bidini vs. Ashkenazy links:explaining why I put the Bidini back in

I linked to Bidini's performance because it was legal to do so (or most likely so -the pianist links to it from his own site). The Ashkenazy one now linked to is almost certainly not, and most likely has been illegally uploaded to Youtube; and

“

Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a (page on a) site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States (Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry) (from Wikipedia:Copyrights.) )

”

So while the latter performance is better, we may not use it, and the change needs to be reverted. Schissel | Sound the Note! 02:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anything that's not conducted my Giulini. :P I'm fine with the revert. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 05:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Too much analysis?

The amount of time and effort spent in analyzing this concerto is commendable. But it seems the majority of people who will read this article may either be those who are new to this piece of music or to classical music in general. They may not be musicians or schooled in the technical aspects of classical music to any substantial degree. Either way, will they want to read the analytical detail currently in the article? It would seem better to briefly encapsulate each movement. Jonyungk (talk) 03:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree. I tend to heavily analyze each of the movements when writing these articles. Thanks for your advice. Mathpianist93 (talk) 03:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Notable Interpretations

I'm hardly an expert on this or any other classical music piece, but might it be fair to say that Glenn Gould's April 6, 1962 interpretation (with Leonard Bernstein conducting) was "notable"? After all, Maestro Bernstein saw fit to deliver preliminary remarks to that effect: "You're about to hear a rather -- shall we say -- unorthodox performance of the Brahms D-Minor Concerto. A performance distinctly different from any I've ever heard -- or even dreamt of, for that matter -- in its remarkably broad tempi and its frequent departures from Brahms' dynamic indications." Not being an expert, I won't take it upon myself to amend the article. But if anyone agrees with my instinct, please feel free to add Mr. Gould's name to the "Notable Interpretations" section (with Maestro Bernstein as conductor and the New York Philharmonic as players).

(I also thought Leon Fleisher and George Szell performed this masterfully, but whether their interpretation qualifies as "notable" seems far less clear than the question of Mr. Gould's.) --Rckent (talk) 10:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since we're mentioning Gould, I added the Gould/Adler/Baltimore SO performance dating after his NYPO appearance with Bernstein. The tempos are faster adn the piece holds together better as a result, but it is as notable a performance interpretively as the one with Bernstein. BTW, I noticed Zimerman/Rattle on the list, which was a surprise—everything I'd read indicated it was pretty terrible. Comments? Jonyungk (talk) 18:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the Gould/Adler performance. Has it been recorded? I could find no listing of it at Amazon, Arkivmusic, nor any review for it at Classicstoday.com.THD3 (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A performance can be terrible and still be notable. Only remember the premiere of a symphony that we know only too well because of that fact? ;) If I could find a reference to back it up I would put Bronfman/Thomas/SFSO (May 15–18, 2008)—brilliant performance; I was there and loved it.

Anyway…I will see if I can find Fleisher/Szell and if it is notable. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 23:11 29 May, 2008 (UTC)

Is this in fact a list of notable recordings of the work, rather than notable interpretations, however you define "notable"? Perhaps it would be useful to add the dates of the recordings. --Deskford (talk) 16:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added Arthur Rubinstein's first recording of the work, from 1954, with Fritz Reiner and the CSO, a performance of freshness and vigor. It's also the first stereo recording of this piece, AFAIK. Rubinstein's video version with Haitink is also mentioned, but in my view it's not notable, for either positive of negative reasons - it's very ordinary.THD3 (talk) 16:25, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the Arrau/Giulini recording. Arrau is already listed for his performance with Haitink, which is equally notable and appears to be more readily available.THD3 (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Schumann's Suidide?

Robert Schumann did attempt suicide but he never committed suicide. He may have had a latent case of syphilis but it was pneumonia that eventually killed him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingdave84 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Premiere: Hanover or Hamburg?

We're saying it happened in both places. One or the other, please, not both. But which one? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reference says Hanover, so I've updated the article to reflect this. --Deskford (talk) 18:27, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revival in the 1870s

The WP article on Clara Schumann says that in the 1870s she, and Brahms, revived this concerto and brought it into the frequently performed reportory. A footnote gives Joseph Braunstein, Liner notes for a recording of Clara's own piano concerto. I would prefer a more widely accessible reference and so I'll look for one before inserting in the article.Marlindale (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I could not check the claim. It seems that Brahms and Clara each may have played the concerto only once in concert during the 1870's and that it was Hans von Bűlow in the 1880s who gave a big push (concert tour performances) to the concerto (and No. 2) as I wrote in the article. Marlindale (talk) 04:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hanover as New Haven, Leipzig as Broadway?

There is not much said that I can find about the success or failure, or quality, of the first performance in Hanover, but relatively a lot said about negative reaction (despite possible good quality) to the next, Leipzig performance. Could it be that Hanover was viewed as a "small-time" venue, a kind of warmup to the "big-time" of Leipzig? Marlindale (talk) 03:32, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orchestra

It would be nice to show the composition of the orchestra (as is done for the Brahms Concerto No. 2 for instance). I will do it when I get a chance -- and this can be deleted. Beowulf (talk) 19:11, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

German city Hannover

The WP article on the city is titled "Hanover". One can reach it with Hannover. "Hanover, Germany" as it was before today also actually works because Hanover does lead to the desired article. (talk) 03:56, 6 November 2014 (UTC) Marlindale (talk) 04:14, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Andris Nelsons

Andris Nelsons is an interesting conductor, close to the top of the profession and not yet age 40, so why delete a recording by him? I will put it back. Marlindale (talk) 04:06, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Natural vs. French horn

The article Natural horn says "Brahms did not care for the valved horn" and wrote for natural horn, with a footnote to K. C. Moore, "The persistence of the natural horn in the romantic period." I seem to recall that Brahms' preference is mentioned in some other article(s) on his pieces, but I don't recall which. Marlindale (talk) 16:38, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Textual Variations: Timp note at end of Adagio

Some scores have a D for the final 6 notes of the timpani part (instead of an A). But I can't remember which editions, or where this suggestion came from. Lawrence18uk (talk) 19:04, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]