Just transforms my view of w work I already love to the root - that sudden minor key shift in the 1st movement greatly enriches the experience of the work - the first, shorter version, a portrait of joy; the sixteen-year-old had it so right about the moments of sadness and loss.
20:40-20:49 - I will NEVER understand why Mendelssohn chose to revise those 4 bars because the climax of that phrase is UTTER MAGIC and the Eflat cadence feels like such a reward
@Mathieu Moutou compare this version with the Peters Edition at Rehearsal Mark [G], 8th bar (parts available on IMSLP) - the cadence in the more commonly played (Peters Edition) version just 2 bars long, whereas this original 1825 version is executed in 4. he 100% revised it, and I've never understood why considering the original is so good!
I never could understand it either. Perhaps he ran out of weed? Wasn't Woke enough? Just joking. Hi everybody. Great performance! Paul is always awesome. I'm glad he doesn't look like Tom Hanks anymore.
I agree the original sounds more interesting, I think Mendelssohn might have just cut it because it was repetitive and he wanted to be more concise. The two bars in the original with the climax is essentially a cadential 6-4 (chord change each bar) but he doesn't resolve it and does another cadential 6-4 in the next two bars (this time every half bar). I feel like this just weakens the first cadential 6-4. But who knows, only Mendelssohn knows why he cut it. I used the 1825 manuscript as a reference (from the Library of Congress)
Very fascinating to hear this original version, and the introduction was helpful. Outstanding playing by these fine musicians. On the whole, though, I would say that Mendelssohn knew what he was doing when he edited out what are mostly repeats and made the composition tighter and, to my ears, more intense and dramatic. Others may disagree, and that's fine. Thanks for this very interesting performance.
You make a crazy and compelling case for this version. Video performances of the Octet are always something to see. My thoughts are that Mendelssohn cut himself unnecessarily: his compositions often feel short even when they are long because they are often thrill rides. That is true even though there may be less impetus, in the eyes of some future performers of this version, to observe the first-movement repeat. (In the revised version, the scale, leading to the highest note in the Octet, is placed under the first ending, and the repeat therefore has some significance in the unfolding drama.) Even though the repeat has a smaller effect in the 1825 version, it prolongs the Octet as a whole to make it seem less rushed. Exactly what we need when we want only the good aspects of feeling virtuosically rushed by eight string players simultaneously.
9:53 another edition? Edit: Just read title. This is very nice you performed the original, never knew. I don't get why or who cut this, Mendelssohn himself? Anyway great take but I think the dry acoustic slightly took away from it.
At 40:33, the 1st violin plays an open G-string out of nowhere. This has always bothered me in this octet. Why couldn’t Mendelssohn have edited this out too? It wasn’t as pronounced here as in some performances. Many times, it sounds like a loud, random, broad open G out of nowhere. Has always sounded out of place to me. But who am I to judge? lol One of my all time favorite pieces nonetheless!
The introductory information added so much to the enjoyment of the performance. Thank you.
Thank you Nicholas, your preamble made it even more enjoyable
Just transforms my view of w work I already love to the root - that sudden minor key shift in the 1st movement greatly enriches the experience of the work - the first, shorter version, a portrait of joy; the sixteen-year-old had it so right about the moments of sadness and loss.
20:40-20:49 - I will NEVER understand why Mendelssohn chose to revise those 4 bars because the climax of that phrase is UTTER MAGIC and the Eflat cadence feels like such a reward
@Mathieu Moutou compare this version with the Peters Edition at Rehearsal Mark [G], 8th bar (parts available on IMSLP) - the cadence in the more commonly played (Peters Edition) version just 2 bars long, whereas this original 1825 version is executed in 4. he 100% revised it, and I've never understood why considering the original is so good!
I never could understand it either. Perhaps he ran out of weed? Wasn't Woke enough? Just joking.
Hi everybody. Great performance! Paul is always awesome. I'm glad he doesn't look like Tom Hanks anymore.
@@gregorysinger1693 ????
I agree the original sounds more interesting, I think Mendelssohn might have just cut it because it was repetitive and he wanted to be more concise. The two bars in the original with the climax is essentially a cadential 6-4 (chord change each bar) but he doesn't resolve it and does another cadential 6-4 in the next two bars (this time every half bar). I feel like this just weakens the first cadential 6-4. But who knows, only Mendelssohn knows why he cut it. I used the 1825 manuscript as a reference (from the Library of Congress)
Very fascinating to hear this original version, and the introduction was helpful. Outstanding playing by these fine musicians. On the whole, though, I would say that Mendelssohn knew what he was doing when he edited out what are mostly repeats and made the composition tighter and, to my ears, more intense and dramatic. Others may disagree, and that's fine. Thanks for this very interesting performance.
You make a crazy and compelling case for this version. Video performances of the Octet are always something to see. My thoughts are that Mendelssohn cut himself unnecessarily: his compositions often feel short even when they are long because they are often thrill rides. That is true even though there may be less impetus, in the eyes of some future performers of this version, to observe the first-movement repeat. (In the revised version, the scale, leading to the highest note in the Octet, is placed under the first ending, and the repeat therefore has some significance in the unfolding drama.) Even though the repeat has a smaller effect in the 1825 version, it prolongs the Octet as a whole to make it seem less rushed. Exactly what we need when we want only the good aspects of feeling virtuosically rushed by eight string players simultaneously.
Thank you for your performance guys.
Playing starts at 6:20
Amazing!!!!!!😁😁😁😁😁😁
MENDELSHONN UN MUSICO FENOMENAL
22:00 i actually like this cut! i love the revised version that has the first two violins in octaves
This was stunning
So, no one was an impostor.
You’re referring to the vid that twoset did arent u?
9:53 another edition? Edit: Just read title. This is very nice you performed the original, never knew. I don't get why or who cut this, Mendelssohn himself? Anyway great take but I think the dry acoustic slightly took away from it.
06:20 begins
Look at the description. Start and movement titles and start times are indexed.
@@HeifetzMusic got it thank you 👍
Bravissimi!! Nella mia opinione, una delle migliori interpretazioni, assolutamente
At 40:33, the 1st violin plays an open G-string out of nowhere. This has always bothered me in this octet. Why couldn’t Mendelssohn have edited this out too? It wasn’t as pronounced here as in some performances. Many times, it sounds like a loud, random, broad open G out of nowhere. Has always sounded out of place to me. But who am I to judge? lol One of my all time favorite pieces nonetheless!
La música de Mendelssohn es tan hermosa...
ESTAMOS DE ACUERDO
6:20 start
AMAZIIING!
Mendelssohn's Octet deserves a string symphonic performance like Beethoven's late String Quartets.
wow.. ipad paper
.