I have never thought of Ravel as "cold" or clinical. I would say Ravel is more actually more introspective and thoughtful than Debussy. Debussy is very expressive in an extravagant or extroverted way, with generally more harmonic movement and longer melodic lines.
Ravels mother grew up in Madrid, and both of them were born very close to the spanish border. The spanish influence in Ravel was likely a part of him since childhood. Debussy, from what I understand is from a french family.
I've never really gotten why people described Ravel's music as "cold" or "detached", if anything I'd say he's just as expressive as Debussy, maybe just a little more melancholy at times.
Coolness isn't necessarily unexpressive. I think when people refer to Debussy as warmer, it's a reference to a willingness to lean into emotions in almost a decadent way. But that doesn't imply one is more expressive than the other.
I used to approach Debussy with romanticism until some really smart people suggested that I play it with more restraint. My point is that Debussy isn't a romantic composer and he gives very clear and specific instructions to achieve the effect. I don't think Clair de lune should be played romantically, but it certainly is a popular approach and I used it to attract many girls in my day 😉
They were the revolutionaries, while they despised and refused the term impressionist. None of this group were romantic composers. What I find the starkest contrast between these two behemoths is the influence of Ravel‘s basque heritage. It‘s omnipresent, other composers of the era show this influence of their roots, De Falla, Albeniz certainly. Debussy is very light, very lush, Ravel shows a darkness and almost a kind of thoughtfulness while Debussy is more playful and makes you want to drink a glass of wine at 10 am in meadow full of flowers.
I like to think of Debussy as more emotional whereas Ravel is more literal / pictorial. Both of evocative of the subject (water, online) and ‘impressionistic’ but in different ways
I could really feel the difference in the Toccatas. Since the form is so similar, it came down to harmony and I felt that Debussy's Toccata was more harmonious, which I generally think of a lot of his music being. It was also nice to compare them to the more fugue like Toccata from Bach and my favorite from Prokofiev; (gives me chills). This video has also shown me the beauty of Ravel's Jeux d'eau. Thank you for that! Gwendolyn you are a treasure!
This is without doubt one of the most valuable videos comparing Debussy and Ravel available. It’s also profound and deeply moving to see Ravel’s musical lineage handed down through his students. History itself resides just barely below the keys, before our very eyes even.
The chord voicing in Debussy and Ravel remind me so much of a jazz pianist like Bill Evans, but the harmonic logic between the chords is so different from jazz vocabulary. As a jazz enthusiast approaching French classical of that era, all my chord shapes apply, but only if I forget everything I know about progressions.
I feel that Ravel could compose like Debussy but not the other way around. My feeling with Ravel (my favorite composer) is that, after completing a piece he spent some time erasing everything that wasn’t absolutely necessary. Ravels Melodie’s pierce through your heart and Debussy feels to me to use more artífices. And I LOVE Debussy but Ravel is a different kind of human.
Ravel to me is the Emperor of all music. My most-listened piece is the Dutoit recording of Daphnis et Chloé ever since I got statistics - it‘s just out of this world. Imagine writing this. System overload. 😭😭😭😭
@@OrfeoXayasane funnily enough I just worked with Dutoit. We did rakes progress (Stravinsky) at Teatro Colon in Buenos Aires and Les Noces (also Stravinsky) with Martha Argerich. The guy is 86 or 87 and works like a maniac (she as well). He is never tired to rehearse and is very demanding. Just a “note of color”.
Debussy using artifices ? Well, he said the exact same thing about Ravel : "De la musique de fakir, de celle qui fait pousser des fleurs autour d'une chaise." And I think Debussy was totally right ! Debussy's music is never flashy or noisy like Ravel can be ! Cheers from France 😊
The only reason Ravel could compose like Debussy is because Debussy came first and was a revolutionary composer who changed the rules of form, harmony, etc. It’s easy for those who come later to imitate the ones who changed everything, but without Debussy ushering in the modern age of music and creating a new palette for Ravel to use, he wouldn’t have been Ravel. Every composer after 1900, aside from Schoenberg and his disciples, is following Debussy’s lead.
If I understand the comparison, are we saying Debussy is more Dionysian (heart, earthy passion), and Ravel more Apollonian (intellect, airy cool)? That's fair, but I can think of plenty of counterexamples, wherein each displays the other's primary character. (And to wink at the cliche, how many couples have "done it" to Ravel's Bolero, after its famous use in the movie "10"?!) We should bring the "belle eccentrique" Satie into the mix: we then have to add a dash of minimalism, Rosicrucian occult, surreality and absurdity, high and low humor, and let's throw in his huge collection of velvet suits and umbrellas while we're at it!
Love this! Maybe Satie is the result of the somewhat overwhelming commitment of being both Apollonian and Dionysian; always having the other as mistress and never really having a self to be faithful towards
@@0FAS1 Ha ha -- yes! Once upon a time, one had to choose: Wagner or Brahms -- it couldn't be both! Now, everything is fair game: we can love "highest" opera and "lowest" Jersey Shore, late Beethoven string quartets and "Baby Shark"!
@@StoneChords Well in a way I agree haha but it seems to me that the point of style is for it to be pointed toward something constantly beyond our reach, for the Dionysian its something akin to unending ecstasy and for the Apollonian something like unending synthesis. Therefore it seems somewhat exclusive unless we want to go back and forth all the time, but maybe this pendulation is a more approachable form of gnosis...? I am reminded of Gnossienne no.3 and the pendulating rhythm of the base, maybe that was Satie's own attempt at a unification, always somehow felt that it came out of a sort of twilight.
@@0FAS1 Wow -- pendulating, gnosis, synthesis of Dionysian and Apollonian, unification -- I've hit the jackpot of UA-cam comment sections. To all this, I just add my performance of the first four Gnossiennes of Satie, featuring art by Redon: ua-cam.com/video/HjYnw8VomeQ/v-deo.html -- Hope you enjoy!
I absolutely agree they don't equal each other. I'm not sure I agree with the interpretation, one being cooler than the other. But that's the beautiful thing about music is that two people can hear the same piece and draw two different conclusions. Ultimately, they had to compose true to their own being and that's why they sound different to me: Debussy sounds and feels more expansive, Ravel more closed and contained. And if someone feels differently about the two than I do, that is the beautiful thing about music.
Intentional emotion vs anxious emotion Ravel inspired Copland, Gershwin, and ultimately Bernstein with the classic building arrangements that are iconic with the early 1900s in North America. Philip Glass has carried the torch since then.
Some very good points. I would add that Debussy was highly inspired by poetry, so the literary aspect is definitely there in both composers. I think there is a key area this video doesn't touch on and that is that Debussy's music is more improvisational in feel and Ravel's approach is closer to what could be described as musical engineering. Ernest Ansermet stated that he once met Debussy before conducting a performance of Debussy's Nocturnes. Debussy gave him a copy of the score, in it Ansermet noticed a number of corrections, when he asked Debussy which to use, Debussy replied to use whichever he felt worked best, that they were all possibilities and that he was no longer sure. That kind of answer would be anathema to Ravel, who was very precise and meticulous in his musical conceptions. Another area where they differ more significantly than many realize is harmony. Bruce Adolphe made an interesting video pointing out significant differences in the harmonic language of these two composers.
I think I saw Gwendolyn perform at UC Santa Cruz once when I was attending 2000-2005. Ravel has always been my favorite of the Dead Europeans! I love Debussy too, but Ravel is something else.
As someone who loves both somewhat naively, I really appreciate getting this comparison. I like to imagine myself more alike to Debussy but in reality have more of Ravels coldness and I think thats why I prefer the expansiveness i feel when listening to Debussy. Always interesting to think that they abhorred the "impressionistic" term. A complex reality that is hard to convey often leaves but a fleeting impression on the listener 🌈
I suspect that they resented having their music categorized based on the convenience of being the most popular during an era defined by the Impressionist painters. Nobody likes being pigeon-holed. Apparently they both resented being likened to each other. I love both of them and don't want to choose one as being better than the other but lean to Debussy because his works are more accessible both when listening and playing. Ravel is more complicated, makes the listener and pianist work harder. But they both tend to take us to the same place. Worth extra work in the case of Ravel.
I've always thought of them as a Romantic, and a Classicist. Debussy the former, Ravel the latter. I know it's not totally applicable from a truly dictionary definition point of view, but it does give one a starting point from which to see them. A certain ambiguity and abstraction in Debussy, an imagery and colour that is purely sensual. While with Ravel you have an almost clinical observation of an event. An honesty that so deeply examines its subject, but doesn't dare get involved too intimately, letting the listener make that choice.
My hot take) I personally favor Ravel over Debussy, because of a single chord and orchestration. I'm not joking. The minor 9th chord can be found abundantly in almost every Ravel's piece, and it adds a sense of bittersweetness, self reflection, although the emotion can differ by the context. Ravel contains this chord in almost every piece, yet it never feels boring, he incorporates emotions very well in my opinion. The video states that Ravel tends to be less emotional, but I think Ravel was rather a master at conveying emotions (ex his magnum opus Daphnis et Chloe). I also love Ravel's orchestration. It's always nice to compare his piano pieces to the orchestrated versions.
Comparing is part of the enjoyment of music, I believe, excellent example D vs R. That reminds me of Scarlatti vs Handel in the baroque Italy competition, you know what happened. On another takeaway, my harpsichord teacher in the early 70s was a pupil of Landowska. So my peers and I considered ourselves her “musical grandchildren”. Beyond the music, the chance to get first hand anecdotes was fascinating, I guess you might also enjoyed that part of your exposure with Maestro Perlmutter (this is the spelling of a friend of mine whose name sounds the same, sorry if not correct) Thank you!
Both Claude Debussy and Maurice Ravel are symbolists like Erik Satie, they're very atmospherical with their music. They like to dwell on the subconscious mind, but what makes Ravel different from Debussy is that he uses more subtlety in his music, it is much more complex harmonically. Like in his Noctuelles, and the Jeux D'Eau, the arpeggios and the melodies are based on whole tone scales, but they're so very well hidden inside the music. It's like you really have to dig deep in there.. more like. submerge yourself into the musical world of Ravel in order to understand it. One of the factors could be because he is a Pisces-Aquarius cusp? One of the water signs who are highly perceptible to everything, but also combining some of the visionary features of an Aquarius. Debussy on the other hand is more bold, his music can easily reach you as if you were more involved with it, more intimate and welcoming to the listener. It could be because he is a Leo-Virgo cusp, one of the fire signs who are known to be generous and compassionate, similarly introspective like Ravel, but because of the Virgo cusp, it almost makes them rather secretive because they tend to keep to themselves, although they strive for perfection in their daily lives.
Can't relate to this. Both composers' works are equally filled with emotion. Both can be cold or warm depending on the piece. For example, I find many of Debussy's preludes and and etudes to be extremely 'cold' when they aim to evoke physical movement (le vent dans la plaine) or abstract musical ideas (any etude). And how could you play Ravel's Mere l'Oye or the Adagio from his G Major Concerto without warmth and emotion?
?? Isn't it because the theme is actually tragic for the ravel piece? It's Pavane pour une infante defuncte!! Literally about a dead child. Clair de lune is inspired by a poem by verlaine which is not nearly as tragic! It's not SUPPOSED to be that sad!
@@animalsarebeautifulpeople3094 ravel said it's supposed to be a pavane for a dead princess, not a dead pavane for a princess (when he heard how slow and sadly someone played it). he also chose the name because it rhymes in french
@@astanakazakhstan3220 Yes, he was criticizing overly romantic playing of the piece. It's like overacting a sad part of a play - once there's overacting, it takes away from real emotion. Joseph said it "tears at" his heartstrings, because clearly it's a sad piece.
*DEBUSSY and Tchaikovsky* were the most beloved composers of the late Michael Jackson, who himself was both neoromantic (Earth Song, Speechless) and impressionist (Stranger In Moscow) composer.
They're definitely not the same and this assessment makes a lot of sense to me! They both make beautiful, highly melodic music with similar qualities, but Debussy is way more 'out there' where Ravel is very structured. Debussy's music frequently has a loose and amorphous quality, while Ravel's is intricate and tightly woven. Debussy broke a lot of rules, Ravel's music adheres to the "rules" of neoclassicism. I love them both, and while I think Ravel's music is slightly more "beautiful" than Debussy's, I slightly prefer Debussy because I find him to be more creative overall.
I love her comments, but her characterization of "pudeur" as restraint is not quite accurate. "La pudeur" evokes a kind of erotic tension between private desires and public requirements for modesty. Voltaire famously commented "La pudeur passe, et l'amour seul demeure." He was observing that this tension always yields to love, and that is what imbues "pudeur" with such potency. The drama of its inevitable yielding.
Yes. I teach that it is the difference between observance and participation, or the event itself, and how the event makes you feel. Its about degrees of separation. The complication comes when you must decide as a performer whether to underscore the composer's orientation or impose affect through effect. It is more important with some composers than others that you shouldn't! Here's the difference, as it is manifest in vocal performances of Vivalidi's, Sposa, Son Disprezzata, where Sumi Jo is clearly detached, musically, and Cecelia Bartoli is 'living it'. One performance is...additive, to theatrical effect, while the other transparent and unvarnished. Both are well wrought musically. Which do you prefer. ua-cam.com/video/aSQqycalzAs/v-deo.html Sumi evocatively tells a story (not one lived, not her own) of a woman scarred, who is reflecting back on her experience. There is therefore a...double detachment to it. It is possessed by the objective hind-sight of a woman consigned to her misery. As such, and possibly appropriately, as a recitalist, I feel and hear her reaching for the technique and voice necessary to communicate her story and desperation to 'someone else' who could not possibly otherwise understand. She lacks, or rather...'avoids' theatre in order to maintain her dignity and cognitive composure as she tells the story of another to another ; the better to manage her technique as a spectator reflecting on her own performance. On the other hand, ua-cam.com/video/a_2VS4NFAXU/v-deo.html Cecelia is living 'it', and attempting to explain her situation to herself, in the moment! No one is her intended audience; she is not talking to anyone. There is extreme, almost inappropriate breach of privacy for having eavesdropped. We feel we have no right to bare witness to this moment. In fact, its more intimate than that: you are in her mind, not in her presence, because she is not present to witness. No scar has formed yet, there is just a open wound, and the accompanying existential resignation that it will fester unto death. As much as I like Sumi's voice (and I do), I always here the technique in both her voice and the music she makes, which impresses, because that is the intent: to participate 'in' the music. Know also that it is a fact that musicians of all kinds who unconsciously encourage cognizance of their technical skill (hearing their fight with, and defeat of technical difficulty) are preferred by fans (who tend to be amateurs who don't participate sufficiently in technique to know it is a soft victory) who are attracted to champions who audibly defeat difficulty, over those who do not draw attention to any aspect of vocal technique or pedagogy. With Cecelia you only 'see' the effort on occasion (the acting not withstanding), you never hear it. She does not attempt to participate in it, but rather disappears in service of music. As such she fails to impress, because nothing 'sounds' hard, for lacking the intended artifact of performance that attracts the amateurs ear and want of a hero. It is the difference between a consummate technician (a thing so rare as to have value for what they 'bring' to the music), and a consummate 'musician' (a thing even more rare and but far less easy to appreciate for not being value additive). Apples and oranges! Try seeking out my comment regarding the same distinction between a great 'guitarist', John Williams, the great technician, and the great 'musician' (who also plays the guitar), Julian Bream, whose performances transcend reduction to discussion of technical facility. In this case too it is the case that fans prefer the hero who audibly defeats the difficulty, over the musician who submits to the music: ua-cam.com/video/bI3K-Ir_MWU/v-deo.html They are both of the same calibre, but like Cecilia and Sumi, they are not of the same species because they do not endeavour to the same end; though the one could be made to by adoption of musical humility that she doesn't yet possess; though she would lose her fans Then try closing 'your eyes and listen to them both again, and see if I'm not right.
a lo largo de la historia nadie pudo comprender realmente la grandeza de los trabajos de ravel y se cansaron de tirarle flores a debussy que si bien es un gran compositor siempre vendió mucho más humo! es una lástima porque me parece que los separan varios escalones de intelectualidad tanto a nivel personal como artístico
pourquoi on a peu de vidéos qui parle de notre musique... que des anglo ou "english speaker".... qui parle de NOTRE musique..... y a un problème de fond les caisfran....
@@cooltrades7469 I'm just saying that because at least for Jeux D'eau, she has recorded the complete solo piano works of Ravel. If she has recorded them, don't you think she should have played Jeux D'eau herself?
Love both Ravel and Debussy. Have no problem at all to hear the differences between them... EXCEPT for their string quartets. I never succeed to tell which is Debussy and which is Ravel...
These are very subjective observations. One could easily swap the composers names and keep all the rest of the explanation the same. People who can tell these two composers apart already know all their pieces.
... Well that would not have impress me... Although the subject is true and there are plenty of things to be said about the differences between the two. But here it is seems to be content for the sake of it, and I found my myself quite irked by this video... I acknowledge that some of it has to be with the format and the length of the video. But some of the point lack substance... For instance the first point is just highly subjective, and should not in my opinion be an element of aesthetic characterization. Yet, there is something be said here. because whether you feel as the character or an observer of the action depicting is really up to anyone feeling. but the motif she describes as droplets in Reflets dans l'eau, doesn't seems to have a purpose other than evocating something (in trhis case little droplets perhaps), and that is a feauture that is less presents in ravel music I believe. The same thing goes for "context", I mean I don't things is really relevant also... two different piece, that want to tell two different stories, might have two different "context", that is not specific to Ravel and debussy...That fact the two piece display music tools from spanish culture is interesting however... for, now, we might ask how Ravel and Debussy integrate those elements in regard to their language. What would have perhaps been more interesting, in regard to context, would have been to take two piece with a simillar "context" ... Like I don't know, general lavigne eccentric form Debussy and Aborada del Gracioso from Ravel, because it seems that the two want to portrait a ridicule character. The point on texture was the shortest when it informs the most in my opinion (in regard two the other points). And I think it very regrettable because I am sure that Ms Wok has to say could be interesting, and some of it was... And I should not like to appear too "judgy" but since YTR allow us to lash out... Although I stand by the fact, it is irrating to see someone that believe way more capable than me, speak a bit poorly of the subject. PS: I might also that skipped completely the point andthus, I shall greatly appreciate any precisions about how one might have understand the point about perspective and context differently ^^
Believe me, the average American woman could care less about these composers. Probably would like Sting maybe or some Rap star but classical? Nope. And a lot will say dumb things about how they hate Jazz, or say Bob Dylan sings out of tune. And mention Elizabethan Lute music and you have to call Medics cause you just induced a Coma. I like all styles myself but older women (my age group) are pretty stuck on what they danced to at the Prom in High School.
Debussy descended from romantic music, and his sound was more about showing a bigger picture with louder emotions. Ravel on the other hand descended from the classical era, and his compositional style was more intimate and detail oriented. In feline terms, Debussy was a lion, and Ravel was a kitten.
i think you are completely wrong, debussy is far more accesible to the amateur piano players but to play ravel you have to understand every single point of his music
She's so good she can play these pieces with her mind.
You have a talented poltergeist
Really? I found him rather clunky for a weightless being.
God i love ravel so much
I have never thought of Ravel as "cold" or clinical. I would say Ravel is more actually more introspective and thoughtful than Debussy. Debussy is very expressive in an extravagant or extroverted way, with generally more harmonic movement and longer melodic lines.
Ravels mother grew up in Madrid, and both of them were born very close to the spanish border. The spanish influence in Ravel was likely a part of him since childhood. Debussy, from what I understand is from a french family.
Every time I pick up one of Ravel's scores, I want to give up composing.
mood
Too late, we'll have to live with Your shit now....
I was gonna comment the same thing
I've never really gotten why people described Ravel's music as "cold" or "detached", if anything I'd say he's just as expressive as Debussy, maybe just a little more melancholy at times.
Coolness isn't necessarily unexpressive. I think when people refer to Debussy as warmer, it's a reference to a willingness to lean into emotions in almost a decadent way. But that doesn't imply one is more expressive than the other.
his music has a third person POV in my opinion
I've always thought that Ravel was the greater composer.
@@A_Few_Thoughts I'm only now realising I prefer Ravel's works although I had placed Debussy as one of my favourite composers (the other being Rach).
@@A_Few_Thoughts I prefer Ravel over Debussy of course, but I wouldn't dare to call one greater than the other
I used to approach Debussy with romanticism until some really smart people suggested that I play it with more restraint. My point is that Debussy isn't a romantic composer and he gives very clear and specific instructions to achieve the effect. I don't think Clair de lune should be played romantically, but it certainly is a popular approach and I used it to attract many girls in my day 😉
hah maybe I should learn clair de lune then lol
They were the revolutionaries, while they despised and refused the term impressionist. None of this group were romantic composers. What I find the starkest contrast between these two behemoths is the influence of Ravel‘s basque heritage. It‘s omnipresent, other composers of the era show this influence of their roots, De Falla, Albeniz certainly. Debussy is very light, very lush, Ravel shows a darkness and almost a kind of thoughtfulness while Debussy is more playful and makes you want to drink a glass of wine at 10 am in meadow full of flowers.
Wonderful presentation!!!Love the comparison….as a pianist this is outstanding!!!
I like to think of Debussy as more emotional whereas Ravel is more literal / pictorial. Both of evocative of the subject (water, online) and ‘impressionistic’ but in different ways
An excellent presentation. I think many very valid points in comparison and contrast. This video is a real treasure.
I could really feel the difference in the Toccatas. Since the form is so similar, it came down to harmony and I felt that Debussy's Toccata was more harmonious, which I generally think of a lot of his music being. It was also nice to compare them to the more fugue like Toccata from Bach and my favorite from Prokofiev; (gives me chills). This video has also shown me the beauty of Ravel's Jeux d'eau. Thank you for that! Gwendolyn you are a treasure!
More of a Ravel man myself.
This is without doubt one of the most valuable videos comparing Debussy and Ravel available. It’s also profound and deeply moving to see Ravel’s musical lineage handed down through his students. History itself resides just barely below the keys, before our very eyes even.
Sooo glad I found you. Thank You for this excellent comparison of these two masters.
The chord voicing in Debussy and Ravel remind me so much of a jazz pianist like Bill Evans, but the harmonic logic between the chords is so different from jazz vocabulary. As a jazz enthusiast approaching French classical of that era, all my chord shapes apply, but only if I forget everything I know about progressions.
What a terrific professor.
I feel that Ravel could compose like Debussy but not the other way around.
My feeling with Ravel (my favorite composer) is that, after completing a piece he spent some time erasing everything that wasn’t absolutely necessary. Ravels Melodie’s pierce through your heart and Debussy feels to me to use more artífices.
And I LOVE Debussy but Ravel is a different kind of human.
Ravel to me is the Emperor of all music. My most-listened piece is the Dutoit recording of Daphnis et Chloé ever since I got statistics - it‘s just out of this world. Imagine writing this. System overload. 😭😭😭😭
@@OrfeoXayasane funnily enough I just worked with Dutoit. We did rakes progress (Stravinsky) at Teatro Colon in Buenos Aires and Les Noces (also Stravinsky) with Martha Argerich.
The guy is 86 or 87 and works like a maniac (she as well). He is never tired to rehearse and is very demanding.
Just a “note of color”.
Debussy using artifices ? Well, he said the exact same thing about Ravel : "De la musique de fakir, de celle qui fait pousser des fleurs autour d'une chaise." And I think Debussy was totally right ! Debussy's music is never flashy or noisy like Ravel can be ! Cheers from France 😊
I feel exactly the opposite. Debussy string quartet mvmnt III, Gradus ad parnassum, and so much more...
The only reason Ravel could compose like Debussy is because Debussy came first and was a revolutionary composer who changed the rules of form, harmony, etc.
It’s easy for those who come later to imitate the ones who changed everything, but without Debussy ushering in the modern age of music and creating a new palette for Ravel to use, he wouldn’t have been Ravel.
Every composer after 1900, aside from Schoenberg and his disciples, is following Debussy’s lead.
Gwendolyn, I can watch you all day. Tonebase, please give Gwendolyn her own channel.
If I understand the comparison, are we saying Debussy is more Dionysian (heart, earthy passion), and Ravel more Apollonian (intellect, airy cool)? That's fair, but I can think of plenty of counterexamples, wherein each displays the other's primary character. (And to wink at the cliche, how many couples have "done it" to Ravel's Bolero, after its famous use in the movie "10"?!) We should bring the "belle eccentrique" Satie into the mix: we then have to add a dash of minimalism, Rosicrucian occult, surreality and absurdity, high and low humor, and let's throw in his huge collection of velvet suits and umbrellas while we're at it!
Love this! Maybe Satie is the result of the somewhat overwhelming commitment of being both Apollonian and Dionysian; always having the other as mistress and never really having a self to be faithful towards
@@0FAS1 Ha ha -- yes! Once upon a time, one had to choose: Wagner or Brahms -- it couldn't be both! Now, everything is fair game: we can love "highest" opera and "lowest" Jersey Shore, late Beethoven string quartets and "Baby Shark"!
@@StoneChords Well in a way I agree haha but it seems to me that the point of style is for it to be pointed toward something constantly beyond our reach, for the Dionysian its something akin to unending ecstasy and for the Apollonian something like unending synthesis. Therefore it seems somewhat exclusive unless we want to go back and forth all the time, but maybe this pendulation is a more approachable form of gnosis...? I am reminded of Gnossienne no.3 and the pendulating rhythm of the base, maybe that was Satie's own attempt at a unification, always somehow felt that it came out of a sort of twilight.
@@0FAS1 Wow -- pendulating, gnosis, synthesis of Dionysian and Apollonian, unification -- I've hit the jackpot of UA-cam comment sections. To all this, I just add my performance of the first four Gnossiennes of Satie, featuring art by Redon: ua-cam.com/video/HjYnw8VomeQ/v-deo.html -- Hope you enjoy!
A Nietzschean take
I absolutely agree they don't equal each other. I'm not sure I agree with the interpretation, one being cooler than the other. But that's the beautiful thing about music is that two people can hear the same piece and draw two different conclusions. Ultimately, they had to compose true to their own being and that's why they sound different to me: Debussy sounds and feels more expansive, Ravel more closed and contained. And if someone feels differently about the two than I do, that is the beautiful thing about music.
Love Debussy but Ravel is really special in my heart.
Intentional emotion vs anxious emotion
Ravel inspired Copland, Gershwin, and ultimately Bernstein with the classic building arrangements that are iconic with the early 1900s in North America.
Philip Glass has carried the torch since then.
Some very good points. I would add that Debussy was highly inspired by poetry, so the literary aspect is definitely there in both composers. I think there is a key area this video doesn't touch on and that is that Debussy's music is more improvisational in feel and Ravel's approach is closer to what could be described as musical engineering. Ernest Ansermet stated that he once met Debussy before conducting a performance of Debussy's Nocturnes. Debussy gave him a copy of the score, in it Ansermet noticed a number of corrections, when he asked Debussy which to use, Debussy replied to use whichever he felt worked best, that they were all possibilities and that he was no longer sure. That kind of answer would be anathema to Ravel, who was very precise and meticulous in his musical conceptions. Another area where they differ more significantly than many realize is harmony. Bruce Adolphe made an interesting video pointing out significant differences in the harmonic language of these two composers.
I think I saw Gwendolyn perform at UC Santa Cruz once when I was attending 2000-2005. Ravel has always been my favorite of the Dead Europeans! I love Debussy too, but Ravel is something else.
As someone who loves both somewhat naively, I really appreciate getting this comparison.
I like to imagine myself more alike to Debussy but in reality have more of Ravels coldness and I think thats why I prefer the expansiveness i feel when listening to Debussy.
Always interesting to think that they abhorred the "impressionistic" term. A complex reality that is hard to convey often leaves but a fleeting impression on the listener 🌈
i like your thoughts
@@themissinglambsauce962"WHERE'S THE LAMB SAUCE"
I suspect that they resented having their music categorized based on the convenience of being the most popular during an era defined by the Impressionist painters. Nobody likes being pigeon-holed. Apparently they both resented being likened to each other. I love both of them and don't want to choose one as being better than the other but lean to Debussy because his works are more accessible both when listening and playing. Ravel is more complicated, makes the listener and pianist work harder. But they both tend to take us to the same place. Worth extra work in the case of Ravel.
I would indeed be impressed if somebody was able to explain to me these differences on a date.
I've always thought of them as a Romantic, and a Classicist. Debussy the former, Ravel the latter. I know it's not totally applicable from a truly dictionary definition point of view, but it does give one a starting point from which to see them. A certain ambiguity and abstraction in Debussy, an imagery and colour that is purely sensual. While with Ravel you have an almost clinical observation of an event. An honesty that so deeply examines its subject, but doesn't dare get involved too intimately, letting the listener make that choice.
Fantastic video, tonebase. Brava Gwen!
My hot take)
I personally favor Ravel over Debussy, because of a single chord and orchestration. I'm not joking. The minor 9th chord can be found abundantly in almost every Ravel's piece, and it adds a sense of bittersweetness, self reflection, although the emotion can differ by the context. Ravel contains this chord in almost every piece, yet it never feels boring, he incorporates emotions very well in my opinion. The video states that Ravel tends to be less emotional, but I think Ravel was rather a master at conveying emotions (ex his magnum opus Daphnis et Chloe). I also love Ravel's orchestration. It's always nice to compare his piano pieces to the orchestrated versions.
Comparing is part of the enjoyment of music, I believe, excellent example D vs R. That reminds me of Scarlatti vs Handel in the baroque Italy competition, you know what happened. On another takeaway, my harpsichord teacher in the early 70s was a pupil of Landowska. So my peers and I considered ourselves her “musical grandchildren”. Beyond the music, the chance to get first hand anecdotes was fascinating, I guess you might also enjoyed that part of your exposure with Maestro Perlmutter (this is the spelling of a friend of mine whose name sounds the same, sorry if not correct) Thank you!
ravel somehow always sounds more dainty.
I laughed at the Intro ...'' if you want to impress a girl ;))))))''. That is a hypoteticaly existing person ;))).
what about those of us who are more interested in impressing boys?
@@da__lang u gay, bro? unless...☠
Melhor video que vi hoje!
When I think of these two composers I think of their string quartets. When I think of piano I think of Ravel.
"contemporaries of each other"
What about Debussy's etudes?
Excellent video!
Very nice vídeo !! Thanks for that❤❤❤
Both Claude Debussy and Maurice Ravel are symbolists like Erik Satie, they're very atmospherical with their music. They like to dwell on the subconscious mind, but what makes Ravel different from Debussy is that he uses more subtlety in his music, it is much more complex harmonically. Like in his Noctuelles, and the Jeux D'Eau, the arpeggios and the melodies are based on whole tone scales, but they're so very well hidden inside the music. It's like you really have to dig deep in there.. more like. submerge yourself into the musical world of Ravel in order to understand it. One of the factors could be because he is a Pisces-Aquarius cusp? One of the water signs who are highly perceptible to everything, but also combining some of the visionary features of an Aquarius. Debussy on the other hand is more bold, his music can easily reach you as if you were more involved with it, more intimate and welcoming to the listener. It could be because he is a Leo-Virgo cusp, one of the fire signs who are known to be generous and compassionate, similarly introspective like Ravel, but because of the Virgo cusp, it almost makes them rather secretive because they tend to keep to themselves, although they strive for perfection in their daily lives.
Please extend it with pieces like La vallee des cloches or Cathedral engloutie
Can't relate to this. Both composers' works are equally filled with emotion. Both can be cold or warm depending on the piece. For example, I find many of Debussy's preludes and and etudes to be extremely 'cold' when they aim to evoke physical movement (le vent dans la plaine) or abstract musical ideas (any etude). And how could you play Ravel's Mere l'Oye or the Adagio from his G Major Concerto without warmth and emotion?
8:22 yeah..... i feel the same little poltergeist.... i feel the same...
Tone base new method, Telekinesis, when is the class for this technique
The ravel pavane is better imo than clair de lune exactly because of that restraint. I find it tears at my heartstrings more.
?? Isn't it because the theme is actually tragic for the ravel piece? It's Pavane pour une infante defuncte!! Literally about a dead child. Clair de lune is inspired by a poem by verlaine which is not nearly as tragic! It's not SUPPOSED to be that sad!
@@animalsarebeautifulpeople3094 ravel said it's supposed to be a pavane for a dead princess, not a dead pavane for a princess (when he heard how slow and sadly someone played it). he also chose the name because it rhymes in french
@@astanakazakhstan3220 Yes, he was criticizing overly romantic playing of the piece. It's like overacting a sad part of a play - once there's overacting, it takes away from real emotion. Joseph said it "tears at" his heartstrings, because clearly it's a sad piece.
*DEBUSSY and Tchaikovsky* were the most beloved composers of the late Michael Jackson, who himself was both neoromantic (Earth Song, Speechless) and impressionist (Stranger In Moscow) composer.
Great analysis for such a pair of fascinating artists. For as much as I enjoy Ravel´s clinical chromatism. Debussy´s Voluptuousness is pure seduction.
@Themis-if1xs Drugs
@@pablov1973 Some serious mind altering shit.
The only difference she really stated was “texture”, the rest of the differences are just subjective and depends on the interpretation
Wdym inspiration from visual or litterature how would that even work?
such a good video!!!
Well, they are spelled differently, and have different numbers of syllables... Are you impressed now?
They're definitely not the same and this assessment makes a lot of sense to me! They both make beautiful, highly melodic music with similar qualities, but Debussy is way more 'out there' where Ravel is very structured. Debussy's music frequently has a loose and amorphous quality, while Ravel's is intricate and tightly woven. Debussy broke a lot of rules, Ravel's music adheres to the "rules" of neoclassicism. I love them both, and while I think Ravel's music is slightly more "beautiful" than Debussy's, I slightly prefer Debussy because I find him to be more creative overall.
In that case, the next topic should be the difference between Rachmaninoff and Scriabin!
I love her comments, but her characterization of "pudeur" as restraint is not quite accurate. "La pudeur" evokes a kind of erotic tension between private desires and public requirements for modesty. Voltaire famously commented "La pudeur passe, et l'amour seul demeure." He was observing that this tension always yields to love, and that is what imbues "pudeur" with such potency. The drama of its inevitable yielding.
Are these from the piano rolls Debussy recorded?
Yes. I teach that it is the difference between observance and participation, or the event itself, and how the event makes you feel. Its about degrees of separation. The complication comes when you must decide as a performer whether to underscore the composer's orientation or impose affect through effect. It is more important with some composers than others that you shouldn't! Here's the difference, as it is manifest in vocal performances of Vivalidi's, Sposa, Son Disprezzata, where Sumi Jo is clearly detached, musically, and Cecelia Bartoli is 'living it'. One performance is...additive, to theatrical effect, while the other transparent and unvarnished. Both are well wrought musically. Which do you prefer. ua-cam.com/video/aSQqycalzAs/v-deo.html
Sumi evocatively tells a story (not one lived, not her own) of a woman scarred, who is reflecting back on her experience. There is therefore a...double detachment to it. It is possessed by the objective hind-sight of a woman consigned to her misery. As such, and possibly appropriately, as a recitalist, I feel and hear her reaching for the technique and voice necessary to communicate her story and desperation to 'someone else' who could not possibly otherwise understand. She lacks, or rather...'avoids' theatre in order to maintain her dignity and cognitive composure as she tells the story of another to another ; the better to manage her technique as a spectator reflecting on her own performance.
On the other hand, ua-cam.com/video/a_2VS4NFAXU/v-deo.html Cecelia is living 'it', and attempting to explain her situation to herself, in the moment! No one is her intended audience; she is not talking to anyone. There is extreme, almost inappropriate breach of privacy for having eavesdropped. We feel we have no right to bare witness to this moment. In fact, its more intimate than that: you are in her mind, not in her presence, because she is not present to witness. No scar has formed yet, there is just a open wound, and the accompanying existential resignation that it will fester unto death.
As much as I like Sumi's voice (and I do), I always here the technique in both her voice and the music she makes, which impresses, because that is the intent: to participate 'in' the music. Know also that it is a fact that musicians of all kinds who unconsciously encourage cognizance of their technical skill (hearing their fight with, and defeat of technical difficulty) are preferred by fans (who tend to be amateurs who don't participate sufficiently in technique to know it is a soft victory) who are attracted to champions who audibly defeat difficulty, over those who do not draw attention to any aspect of vocal technique or pedagogy.
With Cecelia you only 'see' the effort on occasion (the acting not withstanding), you never hear it. She does not attempt to participate in it, but rather disappears in service of music. As such she fails to impress, because nothing 'sounds' hard, for lacking the intended artifact of performance that attracts the amateurs ear and want of a hero. It is the difference between a consummate technician (a thing so rare as to have value for what they 'bring' to the music), and a consummate 'musician' (a thing even more rare and but far less easy to appreciate for not being value additive). Apples and oranges!
Try seeking out my comment regarding the same distinction between a great 'guitarist', John Williams, the great technician, and the great 'musician' (who also plays the guitar), Julian Bream, whose performances transcend reduction to discussion of technical facility. In this case too it is the case that fans prefer the hero who audibly defeats the difficulty, over the musician who submits to the music: ua-cam.com/video/bI3K-Ir_MWU/v-deo.html They are both of the same calibre, but like Cecilia and Sumi, they are not of the same species because they do not endeavour to the same end; though the one could be made to by adoption of musical humility that she doesn't yet possess; though she would lose her fans
Then try closing 'your eyes and listen to them both again, and see if I'm not right.
does anyone know the name of the last piece? 10:01
It's the 2nd movement of sonatine by Ravel
What was that piece she played last in the outro?
0:00 in my case, it was much more successful being able to play "your song" from elton john...😁
Does anyone know the model of Yamaha piano used in this video?
Disklavier, I think.
Karen Mok and Gwendolyn Mok are NOT the same!
a lo largo de la historia nadie pudo comprender realmente la grandeza de los trabajos de ravel y se cansaron de tirarle flores a debussy que si bien es un gran compositor siempre vendió mucho más humo! es una lástima porque me parece que los separan varios escalones de intelectualidad tanto a nivel personal como artístico
I am not saving that to a girl on the date. Besides that, great content!
the big difference is that Claude was into women and Maurice was a misogynist. the warmth of Debussy is the opposite of Ravel's modernist precision
I've never heard of the idea debussy and ravel were similar to be honest lol. La valse, scarbo, grotesque sonata? How can you hear Debussy in that lol
So in summation, Ravel ≤ √log(Debussy).
Don’t make me pick.
I totally disagree with “restraint” on Pavana.
It is so sad and open wounded.
If that is “restraint” you must be a volcano of passion…
pourquoi on a peu de vidéos qui parle de notre musique... que des anglo ou "english speaker".... qui parle de NOTRE musique..... y a un problème de fond les caisfran....
Feel free to make a video about your music in your language...
With all respect to Debusy, I've always thought that Ravel is the better composer.
Just on the strength of one piece, Debussy is more famous than Ravel.
0:49 She's cheating! She's not playing Reflets dan l'eau or Jeux d'eau!
We actually saw that , but she might have recided before for visual purposes :)). And it;s not bad . Chill.
@@cooltrades7469 I'm just saying that because at least for Jeux D'eau, she has recorded the complete solo piano works of Ravel. If she has recorded them, don't you think she should have played Jeux D'eau herself?
@@LioMcAllisterMusic-sw4vjshe’s probably just using the cool feature of that amazing piano
Love both Ravel and Debussy. Have no problem at all to hear the differences between them... EXCEPT for their string quartets. I never succeed to tell which is Debussy and which is Ravel...
Ravel is more "sophisticated" in composition musicology, Debussy is more accessible to us "weekend piano" players
These are very subjective observations. One could easily swap the composers names and keep all the rest of the explanation the same. People who can tell these two composers apart already know all their pieces.
... Well that would not have impress me... Although the subject is true and there are plenty of things to be said about the differences between the two. But here it is seems to be content for the sake of it, and I found my myself quite irked by this video... I acknowledge that some of it has to be with the format and the length of the video. But some of the point lack substance...
For instance the first point is just highly subjective, and should not in my opinion be an element of aesthetic characterization. Yet, there is something be said here. because whether you feel as the character or an observer of the action depicting is really up to anyone feeling. but the motif she describes as droplets in Reflets dans l'eau, doesn't seems to have a purpose other than evocating something (in trhis case little droplets perhaps), and that is a feauture that is less presents in ravel music I believe.
The same thing goes for "context", I mean I don't things is really relevant also... two different piece, that want to tell two different stories, might have two different "context", that is not specific to Ravel and debussy...That fact the two piece display music tools from spanish culture is interesting however... for, now, we might ask how Ravel and Debussy integrate those elements in regard to their language.
What would have perhaps been more interesting, in regard to context, would have been to take two piece with a simillar "context" ... Like I don't know, general lavigne eccentric form Debussy and Aborada del Gracioso from Ravel, because it seems that the two want to portrait a ridicule character.
The point on texture was the shortest when it informs the most in my opinion (in regard two the other points).
And I think it very regrettable because I am sure that Ms Wok has to say could be interesting, and some of it was... And I should not like to appear too "judgy" but since YTR allow us to lash out... Although I stand by the fact, it is irrating to see someone that believe way more capable than me, speak a bit poorly of the subject.
PS: I might also that skipped completely the point andthus, I shall greatly appreciate any precisions about how one might have understand the point about perspective and context differently ^^
Believe me, the average American woman could care less about these composers. Probably would like Sting maybe or some Rap star but classical? Nope. And a lot will say dumb things about how they hate Jazz, or say Bob Dylan sings out of tune. And mention Elizabethan Lute music and you have to call Medics cause you just induced a Coma. I like all styles myself but older women (my age group) are pretty stuck on what they danced to at the Prom in High School.
Debussy descended from romantic music, and his sound was more about showing a bigger picture with louder emotions.
Ravel on the other hand descended from the classical era, and his compositional style was more intimate and detail oriented.
In feline terms, Debussy was a lion, and Ravel was a kitten.
Liked what u said until the feline term analogy which I didn't think worked that great 😅
i think you are completely wrong, debussy is far more accesible to the amateur piano players but to play ravel you have to understand every single point of his music
Debussy: less is more
Ravel:
if I can’t outplay rachmaninoff then why bother
Ravel was even better at orchestration but I just can't really care for his music. Too formal, too classical, too boring.
Ravel is a great composer.....But he cant be compared to Debussy, Debussy is for me what we call a "genius", he is apart.
So Debussy was lazier than Ravel
So in summarion, Ravel > Debussy.
I much prefer Ravel. He had a superior sense of direction, and I love his great attention to detail in his writing.
@@LioMcAllisterMusic-sw4vj Read Debussy in Proportion by Roy Howat.
debussy is more original, but ravel is the better composer
Absolutely not. I love Debussys music but Ravel is from a different planet.
And Ravel is underrated af... 😢😢😢
It’s like comparing apples to oranges. Debussy was a virtuoso, whereas Ravel was a perfectionist.
Now I really know nothing
Except Ravel has Scarbo… and he called Debussy’s Prelude to the afternoon of a Faun the only perfect musical work…so…