This reminds me of a story (which, like so many stories, may be apocryphal) about a counterpoint student who simply copied a Bach fugue, submitted it, and got a B+. The teacher like it, but thought it broke too many rules.
There weren't really many rules for fugues in Bach's time. There were some conventions and some fashionable "tricks" (which changed over time) but essentially it was a "flight of fancy" and quite often improvised. It was only later the fugue was formalised; I have a feeling Sechter deserves much fo the blame/credit for that.
If Mozart were attending the Royal College of Music in London right now and submitted the finale of his Jupiter Symphony for a counterpoint class, he would’ve received a failing mark.
To be sure, the music doesnt go anywhere unexpected or harmonically interesting- but its not terrible. What is terrible is the performance: overuse of the pedal that muddies the phrasing, a tinny tone, a few wrong notes hit, and an uneven tempo that leads to a disjoint in parts of the rhythm .
I'll assume "the worst composer in history" is intended as hyperbole. The sample fugue is performed really poorly - I think the fugue itself is far better than its performance here - which undermines the thesis that Sechter is history's worst composer.
I thought Max Reger was the worst, at least of the notable. Plenty of teachers are inferior to their students, and I'm sure any teacher hopes for this.
When you said that perfect parts can add up to an ... imperfect whole, it reminded me of Lenny Bernstein's comments on Beethoven 7/II. Everything is simple, almost simplistic, but the whole is incredible. Rhythm: Long-short-short repeated; Melody, not overwhelming, sometimes just a single repeated note; harmonization, not earth-shattering; yet the combination of these is so compelling and magical.
Well, I certainly couldn’t compare it to Bach and it has none of the ‘perpetual motion’ of Bach’s great fugues, but it’s surely not bad. Certainly a damn sight better than I could produce.
I hate to write such nastiness, but quite frankly I'm baffled how someone can offer such a poor interpretation of someones music, while claiming at the same time to have looked at a composers body of work it "in considerable detail." (Maestro Cohen hasn't even looked at this piece in considerable detail.) The rhythms are neither played fluently nor are the pitches in their entirety - and those are the absolute basics. From a technical and musical perspective, this presentation also left a lot to be desired. I guess having uninformed and edgy sounding opinions in order to click bait is a thing now in classical music. (QED... as I am actually writing this comment right now. Well played!)
Perhaps if the piece was played with some feeling & sense of structure, instead of just of a flat basic literal sight-reading rendition…one might find something in it. I have no great feeling toward Sechter, and, indeed had never heard of him before today and only clicked based on the title…but this piece certainly didn’t warrant such an assessment of the computer. It was certainly not terrible and sounded fairly similar to what I would expect from an average work from that time period. The performer here seems to have played it as flatly and basically as possible to justify his thesis. I could certainly hear how this piece could be performed with some emotion, voicing, and eclat, especially on a modern piano. “Worst composer in history” is such a subjective statement as-is, but what I heard here does not justify such a statement.
It may be because I generally don't like fugues, but I hear no difference between this and J.S. Bach. Perhaps it boils down to MY being the worst composer in history - but I like superlatives.
@@fredrickroll06 Sounds like Bach to me as well and I've listened to his stuff to the point where I hear (maybe?) his counterpoint to modern pop songs, sort of.
So, Maestro Cohen, you believe this is not a good piece. That is your right, and you have a point of sorts. But instead of giving it your best, as your duty as a musician should be, you decide to perform it as wooden and pedestrian as possible, all but drowned in pedal, only to justify calling Sechter the worst composer in history. Sheesh, what an attitude 🙄
What is most striking about Sechter is his ability to run around in circles like a hamster on a wheel, even when confronted with a theme that seems to have so most potential to go in many musical directions, and is begging you to modulate. And he still runs the little ideas over and over in the same key in the same way. Extraordinary.
there is way more incompetent stuff out there than Sechter. What drives me crazy about Sechter is that the voice leading and counterpoint is so perfect and even beautiful but then he just runs around in circles like a hamster on a wheel. It's worse because in some ways he is so much better. Maybe "most disappointing" would be a better way to put it.
Or his Piano Quintets #1 and #2. Dull as dishwater. And heaven help us, there's a new CD out with his #3 and #4. I'll pass. It's sad ... I love piano quintets, but the man who apparently wrote more of them than any other composer in history was ... Lorenzo Perosi.
@@classicallpvault To be sure, the PC is a low point even in Perosi's work. But it IS a low point, not so much hilariously bad (which would be interesting at least) but just so, so mind-numbingly dreary. David Hurwitz has another, equally worthy candidate, by the way: ua-cam.com/video/66aIdmhXnQs/v-deo.html&pp=ygUdaHVyd2l0eiB3b3JzdCBwaWFubyBjb25jZXJ0b3M%3D
@@bomcabedalThat's an exaggeration. Lorenz's piano music contains some interesting passages that sound very interesting but strange. The orchestration is also strange, but it obviously doesn't fall under the definition of bad, a different category, plus you have to make allowances for the time of composition - the 20th century. Compared to all the dissonances of the time, it's good. Yes, they are generally meaningless works, disjointed phrases, but they are interesting. I don't know why he didn't format it well, the material itself is interesting, but without processing (or he processed it that way on purpose)
In this regard, teaching music is no different from teaching sports. Many of the most brilliant and successful professional sports coaches are mediocre athletes. Sechter might have been an average composer, but he was a brilliant music theorist and composition teacher. And that is what he considered himself to be.
Not a very flattering performance, and even if I am unsure about the merits of the fugue or Sechter (who I did not know), I hardly think this fugue deserves such harsh criticism. Played with feeling on a decent in-tune instrument, I feel it could be beautiful.
I like it quite a lot it is very muted, as in not a lot of relative major noises it is apt for mourning. the fugue subject feels "cut short" halting occasionally, mirroring Schubert's early death
One only wished J.S.Bach were there to have written The Art of Fugue based on that Schubert fugal theme, and one wonders about the possibilities... endless.
I've something for you: passacaglia, 44 variations, cadenza and fugue on the theme of Schubert's unfinished Symphony by Godowski. A gorgeous beautiful work that can replace what we miss
Thank you for this! I appreciate that you so clearly highlight what makes a fugue banal, despite its promise of greatness. Sechter's counterpoint may be ok, but the result adds up to less than the sum of its parts. By contrast, Bach's fugues in the WTC unfold with an inner drama-- through preparation of subjects, then combining them, or through episodic relief. Best of all, Bach plays with his subjects as he does with his listeners. I'll take bad Bach on kazoo and accordion over good Sechter played on a Steinway, any day.
You are correct, just as someone who does not drive can tell when a driver is poor. I have written dozens of fugues in my time and try to avoid writing one to "finish off" a quartet or symphony as they seem an obvious way out. I did not mind the Sechter piece too much, though there was a little box ticking near the middle.
@@cowaylon1681 I made no comment on you being "not allowed" to do something. Declare that you dislike various things to your heart's content. But it is my opinion that when someone has no vision of their own, no actual concept of how something is done, and no concept of how it can in fact be made better, it then comes off as pretentious to drag on endlessly about how horrible it is. For instance, there would be nothing wrong with me saying, "I dislike the film the Godfather." It would be another for me to scathingly disparage the blocking, lighting, and cinematography choices of the film when I in fact, have no experience in any of those subjects. "I dislike it" is a perfectly valid statement. "The fugue subject has infinite potential, all wasted by Sechter, and he is also the worst composer ever" Now that...Well, like I said. Everyone's a critic.
So it's fine to dislike something for no reason, but giving reasons for why you hate it is pretentious and wrong, unless you're an expert. Good thing the guy speaking is a composer himself! Jesus Christ.
3:19 i remember reading that Brahms's habit was to get up early and write a fugue before breakfast. I suppose that, no matter your talent level, the habit of practice does you good.
Agreed. In Bach and others you’d get much more variety in phrase length too. All the entrances and statements are pretty square. At no point does the beat flip around or anything like that.
Nonsense. You're just saying that because of the video's title. This work---which is obviously not good---is identical to any other mediocre fugue of the time period. It's not any more mechanical or dry than those composed by Sechter's contemporaries.
Sounds like nice piece incredibly badly played. Sorry. Could you play some of your, of course much better pieces? Or do you just make UA-cam vids rubbishing others?
@@karllieck9064 no I just stated my opinion. It seems you have a different one, fine. But I am not "pissed off". After all he is just another UA-cam making a bit of money from other people's music. And it's OK by me too. Other people made much more money out of my my music than I did and I could not care less. Good on them👍
Fugue was not too bad. Interpretation could have been much better. Theme was beautiful, with a lot of potential, not developed. Was probably an excellent teacher -- and certainly not like a voice coach who cannot sing. (Credit for the theme must be shared with the authors of the clan's surname, but not the altitudes assigned -- and descending and ascending chromatic sequences have a logic and lyric of their own. But a fugue a day! Surely that puts any mortal at risk of becoming a Turing Machine! Or, maybe, like a photographer who wears a digital camera on his forehead taking nonstop snaps every waking second, one is guaranteed to catch a quota of a few chefs-d'oeuvres across a lifetime -- if anyone has the patience to sift and spot them...)
Thank you for sharing this paradoxical fact, a "bad" composer teaching an icon. It never feels entirely right to comment critically on a musician´s honest efforts, and personal aesthetics, but guilt aside, the most striking thing at first listening is the absence of modulation and drama, which the chosen subject and form sort of begs for. Composer Dave Bruce has a great video about avoiding the "beige" zone in a composition.
Actually, Maestro Cohen, I think you may disprove your thesis a little bit. It is not a bad piece and, in my opinion, does have some poignant harmonies and dissonances. And despite some rather unkind remarks by a few people hear the motivation of which I do not understand, you do play it with a lovely feeling. It should be taken as a given that the piano is not a perfect instrument and that this is a demonstration-type exercise rather than intended as a super-polished performance. The musical feeling that Mr. Cohen imbues the piece with, does, I feel, highlight some of the intrinsic merits of the piece itself, and touchingly uncovers the composer’s sentiment towards Schubert himself and his grief over the latter’s loss. The Picardy third ending is also a nice touch. Yes, everyone, it may not be Bach. But it is worth listening to and I, for one, appreciate Mr. Cohen’s sympathetic interpretation.
@@bernabefernandeztouceda7315 Fist off, "his tone was the trashiest" and "he lived in his own fantasy world" are both invalid and vague arguments, but have you even heard his earlier pieces? Most of his works were composed in traditional form, with traditional harmonies and melodies, nothing incoherent at all. If you wish to hear a coherent piece of music made by Scriabin, I suggest his early piano concerto, not his best work but it is very enjoyable.
Thanks for this! It may be the lack of rhythmic interest that makes it fall short as much as anything. Also, you're right about the rule rigidity for sure.
Tracks for me. No different than how a coach who can't run can help a good runner run faster, or how someone with an IQ of 180 was probably taught by people who were all not as smart as him.
I've always understood that Telemann was the most prolific composer in history. I've read or listened to a good many critiques and theses over the years that bashed and trashed certain composers. Indeed, bashing the work of certain composers goes in and out of fashion. Hindemith is a good example. He rewrote one piece of music, which led to a petulant onslaught against his music in university circles which thankfully seems to have run its course. Holst too was a victim of such nonsense. There is nothing to be gained from such negativity. All we learn is that you look down on this person's music, which is hardly an enlightening experience.
Perhaps Schubert derived something of interest from his single encounter with Sechter and it really doesn't matter about it because he died so soon after, but it was very different in the case of Bruckner, who wasted vast time at different stages of his career paying too much attention to what others (far less musical than he) said, did and thought. He set erroneous standards for himself that were founded on misconceived doubt and insecurity and he devoted sterile time in needless, misplaced deference to the views of lesser men. The fault, say, on Sechter's part was thereby in disingenuously taking money for lessons Bruckner did not need.. Eventually, the insecure composer literally ran out of time and died after spending a morning with pen and ink wrestling with the finale of the ninth symphony, which he could easily have completed had he not lost oceanic time along the way. "Oh no, Anton - I think you'd be better off with a C# in bar 349 !" "Oh do you think so? Perhaps I should rewrite the whole movement then.." That kind of thing. Any worse and he would have been asking the milkman whether to bring the trumpets in before the end of exposition. His designation of the 'early' D minor symphony as 'die Nullte' is ludicrous - it's a very good work, and the F minor symphony is not to be sneezed at either but he would have none of it. In the end, the pieces have become celebrated for being far better than he thought they were, and because they are numbers 0 and 00 ! We cannot all be Mendelssohns, Mozarts or Korngolds, but few composers have been so stricken with self-doubt, had such an inferiority complex as Anton Bruckner, yet the music expresses a rocklike eternal certainty because, I suppose, he was convinced that God had a hand in everything he produced at the same time as it was was giving him the willies that God might not entirely approve of the C natural instead of a C#, in bar 349. In the end, we are lucky to have the eleven symphonies, the masses and so on but, from a great organist (as Bruckner was) very little music for his own instrument, which is bitterly disappointing. Schubert and Bruckner had symphonic successors whose work is accomplished and stimulating - Hans Gal, Felix Weingartner, and of course Franz Schmidt - in his case actually he wrote truly great music. In their symphonies, never less than satisfying writing, Schubert and Bruckner are united and Sechter becomes a mere footnote in history.
I agree with you. Even Bach broke the rules which is why his music is so interesting, juicy, and wonderful. Music has to flow like a river. The best music does that.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the fugue being played, other than it is probably "old school" compared to Schubert and Bruckner. Those throwing stones should be willing to prove their abilities to do better.
This is not surprising at all. Take sports coaches, for example. One can be a great coach and be an encyclopedia of theoretical knowledge about a sport, yet not necessarily have any skill at all in actually performing that sport.
I am not convinced by your choice of dynamics and articulation. They seem random and amateurish to me. I understand that you want to make your point though, fair enough. Reminds me of Glenn Gould making his point about what a bad composer Mozart allegedly was, only I think unlike you, he is totally aware and in control of what he is doing, while you are more or less sight reading.
Do we have any testimony as to the composer’s own practice when playing these pieces? Not the best fugue I’ve heard, but far from the worst! I suspect he expected anyone who played these pieces to do what you did…
Did he write anything other than fugues? Maybe he was better at writing something else? I like his fugue. It’s interesting and played a little more melodically at the beginning would sound even nicer. It’s a lot like music in the Liturgical Organist series that I often used for filler prelude music.
An amazing feat in view of the enormous possibilities of the theme. Intelligence without musical imagination. One wonders what Schubert might have done with it. Thanks!
A true tragedy is that Sechter had assigned Schubert to write a fugue on this theme and only wrote his own version because Schubert died before doing the assignment
Then just play a bit more inspired, my goodness. I would say that the worst composers in history are something like Ludovico Einaudi, Hans Zimmer or Steve Jablonsky.
I agree with you that this piece fails to achieve what Zechter clearly had in his heart (or at least heard in his head), i.e., to compose like J.S. Bach, in this case something along the lines of the B Minor P&F from the Well Tempered Clavier--a quixotic notion, to say the least. But that just makes me sad for him rather than contemptuous. After all, he did tutor Schubert and Bruckner. However, it is incredibly interesting to hear this composition, which must have predated Mendelssohn's conducting of the B Minor Mass, which is usually held up as the start of the Bach "revival." Clearly, JSB had been exerting profound influence at the lower frequencies for years, even if only among the lucky few.
The truth is clearly somewhere in-between. Some composers, like Mozart and Rachmaninoff intuitively wrote the most amazing melodies even as children with hardly any musical training. But on the other hand, it is definitely something that can be learned, too.
I agree. I know people who can write musical notes on paper like me and you writing a letter but yet can't pen a tune. If having knowledge of Harmony and Counterpoint is all you need to write music, dedication and experience then most composers would have been turning out great tunes forever but it did and does not happen because you either have the gift or you don't.
No, you can learn that skill but it's harder to some than to others. Even a great melody writer like Chopin learned this skill through practice. His childhood compositions don't come anywhere close to his late works like the Barcarolle or the set of opus 59 Mazurkas. It's even possible to 'crack the code' how to write melodies like Chopin and there's even tutorial videos about this on UA-cam. It involves analysing his melodies and deriving a formula from it. For instance, what are the maximum intervals between two notes? How do groups of notes tend to be grouped together? What keys does he modulate to and in what way does he alter the chords to create more dissonant harmonies? Where is the centre of gravity of a musical phrase supposed to be? How does he turn a simple scale up or down into something more interesting by taking 'detours' back down (or up) and so on. A good set of ears comes naturally. Developing musical skills and putting those ears to good use is a learning process.
"The worst composer in history?" Really? Yes, he might have been a very mediocre composer, though I know of hundreds and possibly thousands of other past composers that would easily beat him to that "award of mediocrity." As a former professor myself of theory and orchestration, I can say with confidence, that Sechter was just another example of a teacher that could teach, though not compose sublime music of his own. Like Schoenberg, and other past composers that were also teachers, he was probably a good mathematician with his understanding of theory, though did not possess the soul of a true artistic composer. As a follower of the First Viennese School of tonality, when I had to teach the music of Schoenberg (and other atonal or serial composers to my former students), I used to cringe, and make funny faces that my students couldn't see, while my back was turned towards them....Ha! ... Peace and Love! 🎅🎄🎁🎄🎅
Well, it was just a standard fugue. There was nothing especially bad about it. It would have sounded much better on an organ. The question is, who will now record his complete works?
But Reger was actually a great composer. He could write incredibly complex music based on very simple ideas and was a master of counterpoint and very adventurous in his use of harmony. The man also had a terriffic sense of humour, once writing to a critic: 'I am in the smallest chamber in my house and have your review in front of me. Soon, it will be behind me!'
Loads of people, myself included, have played Sechter's music because he completed many of Mozart's unfinished contrapuntal works. He does not do such a bad job, though one cannot help wonder where Mozart would have taken the music. On the other hand maybe Mozart did not complete the works because he was dissatisfied with how it was working out (alternatively he did not bother to finish them because he considered that what followed was implicit).
Worst composer in history? Oh geez. That guy will lose the "worst composer" contest to any of many dozens of 20th Century composers. I studied with a "composer" who was producing electronic bleeps and bloops con dancer-in-black-tights as if that were some stunningly novel experiment. A fair test of any composer and his or her music is "Would you want to hear that again? Would you want to hear other pieces by that composer?" That is not a naive or unreasonable test. Schecter could win that decision against numerous century-later composers. Did Schecter ever publish anything? He doesn't appear on IMSLP and I thought even the most trivial 19th Century composers could be found there. Maybe he didn't take this as seriously as we think "composers" ought to do. 5000 fugues? He's tossing these off like most of us would do a crossword puzzle. Maybe he didn't intend greatness with these, maybe he just wanted to test out an idea.
Here's a mind game. If you transcribed this for the church organ, gave it to a master organist, and told him/her that this was a lesser-known piece of J. S. Bach, do you really think this artist would be able to recognize it as an inferior work?
You performed this piece as if you where competing for the title of the worst pianist in history. And YOU are going to criticize someone that Schubert decided to go to for a lesson?
One thing I've learned by listening with a modicum of intelligence to film scores, etc., is that: a fugue subject always sounds like a fugue subject. An example that comes to mind, offhand, is John Williams's Jaws score, at the point where the Fourth-of-July tourists arrive.
Sechter instructed his pupils that they must give up composition entirely for the full length of their studies with him. Bruckner wrote almost nothing for those 5 years he was under Sechter. Bruckner's study was mostly by correspondence and Sechter wrote to him to ask him not to work so hard: presumably the instructor was being bombarded with exercises by the pupil and had an awful lot more marking to do than he was used to! Bruckner became the inheritor of Sechter's mantle in terms of teaching of harmony and counterpoint and Sibelius applied to become his pupil in Vienna, a situation which never came to pass because Bruckner was in poor health by that time and had scaled down his teaching commitments. Fritz Kreisler was unimpressed by Bruckner's classes: I think he found the approach too strict for his liking.
Watch out when you use the word pedagogue or pedagocical in America. I once did in a letter to a department at work and was advised to replace it with another word because the one I was using was reminiscent of child molestation. A true story.
I haven't heard of Sechter before. Thank you for the introduction. The piece does not live up to its potential, perhaps. Or, could be considered a decent _sketch._ I liked it --again, thanks to your effort.
What I hear is a fugue in mostly Bach style. But not with the quality of that. not bad not good. So yes indeed dull. Quite a lot of composers has written like that. But it is not romantic music in any way (maybe except just before the end). So there is a reason why no one knows him today
So Do I. And it makes sense that the music wasn’t deep, if he wrote this practically as an exercise everyday. No mistakes, taking no chances. Historical master but in any way not an innovator. That’s why he was so good at what he did, being a Teacher. Like many studio musicians today, perfectionism is prohibiting creativity.
It needs to have some more interesting rhythmic development. Harmonically it's lovely, but very little imagination has gone into the rather mundane rhythmic choices.
Yeah, it doesn't go anywhere. Could be titled "Sitting at the airport terminal gate waiting for your plane to be cleared to fly by the airline's mechanics only to be told after the wait that the flight has been canceled."
Despite your expressive efforts I had to give up trying to discover the hidden treasure in it. What strikes me is that it is so distanced, uninvolved and not at all reminiscent of Schubert.
To be fair to Sechter, his fugues seem to have been more intended as writing exercises than pieces to be performed. He tried to write at least one every day and at that tempo even the greatest composers is bound run dry. Even Telemann wouldn't have been able to keep up with that tempo of composing and keep a consistent high quality. The fact that Diabelli actually published some of these pieces - well, there's nothing Diabelli wouldn't do for money.
I'm not sure Sechter is the worst composer in history. Based on that fugue. it does sound a bit monotonous, primarily because the leading voices remain in the same tessitura. I do hear that you are trying to play sympathetically, but I think more could be made of the interpretation.
The problem is that after Bach’sons the music turned from counterpoint to verticality And very few music pieces were still based on these patterns And it is common that bad composers but good technicians of music transmitted their knowledge to good composers
This reminds me of a story (which, like so many stories, may be apocryphal) about a counterpoint student who simply copied a Bach fugue, submitted it, and got a B+. The teacher like it, but thought it broke too many rules.
There weren't really many rules for fugues in Bach's time. There were some conventions and some fashionable "tricks" (which changed over time) but essentially it was a "flight of fancy" and quite often improvised. It was only later the fugue was formalised; I have a feeling Sechter deserves much fo the blame/credit for that.
If Mozart were attending the Royal College of Music in London right now and submitted the finale of his Jupiter Symphony for a counterpoint class, he would’ve received a failing mark.
To be sure, the music doesnt go anywhere unexpected or harmonically interesting- but its not terrible. What is terrible is the performance: overuse of the pedal that muddies the phrasing, a tinny tone, a few wrong notes hit, and an uneven tempo that leads to a disjoint in parts of the rhythm .
Exactly what I thought, thank you!
I'll assume "the worst composer in history" is intended as hyperbole. The sample fugue is performed really poorly - I think the fugue itself is far better than its performance here - which undermines the thesis that Sechter is history's worst composer.
I thought Max Reger was the worst, at least of the notable. Plenty of teachers are inferior to their students, and I'm sure any teacher hopes for this.
I also assume he's ignoring all pop composers since 1960.
@@PMA65537 "Pop composer" is almost something of a paradox, no?
In arts there is no such thing as the worst and the best …
I wish I could write a fugue half as good as that. The imperfect cadence at the end was a nice touch. The pianist used far too much pedal....pity
When you said that perfect parts can add up to an ... imperfect whole, it reminded me of Lenny Bernstein's comments on Beethoven 7/II. Everything is simple, almost simplistic, but the whole is incredible. Rhythm: Long-short-short repeated; Melody, not overwhelming, sometimes just a single repeated note; harmonization, not earth-shattering; yet the combination of these is so compelling and magical.
Well, I certainly couldn’t compare it to Bach and it has none of the ‘perpetual motion’ of Bach’s great fugues, but it’s surely not bad. Certainly a damn sight better than I could produce.
If you think that was the worst, you have never heard music by my counterpoint teacher.
May I have his name so that I may avoid him!
@@howardmcclellan2022 Better avoid his name as well!
I hate to write such nastiness, but quite frankly I'm baffled how someone can offer such a poor interpretation of someones music, while claiming at the same time to have looked at a composers body of work it "in considerable detail." (Maestro Cohen hasn't even looked at this piece in considerable detail.) The rhythms are neither played fluently nor are the pitches in their entirety - and those are the absolute basics. From a technical and musical perspective, this presentation also left a lot to be desired. I guess having uninformed and edgy sounding opinions in order to click bait is a thing now in classical music. (QED... as I am actually writing this comment right now. Well played!)
Perhaps if the piece was played with some feeling & sense of structure, instead of just of a flat basic literal sight-reading rendition…one might find something in it. I have no great feeling toward Sechter, and, indeed had never heard of him before today and only clicked based on the title…but this piece certainly didn’t warrant such an assessment of the computer. It was certainly not terrible and sounded fairly similar to what I would expect from an average work from that time period. The performer here seems to have played it as flatly and basically as possible to justify his thesis. I could certainly hear how this piece could be performed with some emotion, voicing, and eclat, especially on a modern piano. “Worst composer in history” is such a subjective statement as-is, but what I heard here does not justify such a statement.
It may be because I generally don't like fugues, but I hear no difference between this and J.S. Bach. Perhaps it boils down to MY being the worst composer in history - but I like superlatives.
@@fredrickroll06 Sounds like Bach to me as well and I've listened to his stuff to the point where I hear (maybe?) his counterpoint to modern pop songs, sort of.
Yes, a conflict of interest here.
This fugue isn't too remarkable but it is a lot better to listen to than, let's say, the works of Ludovico Einaudi or Yann Tiersen.
I Dunno, sounded pretty nice to me. Maybe not some immortal great work, but perfectly pleasant.
I didn't think it was too bad actually. For me it seemed to be able to maintain interest even without a lot of modulation etc.
So, Maestro Cohen, you believe this is not a good piece. That is your right, and you have a point of sorts. But instead of giving it your best, as your duty as a musician should be, you decide to perform it as wooden and pedestrian as possible, all but drowned in pedal, only to justify calling Sechter the worst composer in history. Sheesh, what an attitude 🙄
yeah what is the point of bringing someone down like this, maybe play some schubert for us :)
Mostly agree. Too many goofs. Way way too much pedal. Piano badly out of tune. Can't hear the Sechter for all the howling.
I agree
I cried during this piece ❤
Funny thing, I play “Fur Elise” horribly. The genius still shines through!😁
I'm just an amateur but I think this piece could work much better as an organ transcription or even an orchestral version.
That's an exceptionally vertical way to approach a fugue - as if trying to highlight a 'lack of motion'.
Feels/looks very sightreading-y.
What is most striking about Sechter is his ability to run around in circles like a hamster on a wheel, even when confronted with a theme that seems to have so most potential to go in many musical directions, and is begging you to modulate. And he still runs the little ideas over and over in the same key in the same way. Extraordinary.
Modulation is overrated. Brahms wasn't modulating like that, it was more of a Schubert thang
I sat listening, thinking it was not bad, expecting a contrasting subject that never materialized. It begins well, and ends well. That is it.
The first Bagatelle is definitely like that. A hamster wheel is all it is.
@@bernabefernandeztouceda7315 Modulations, accidentals, chromatisms are spices of music. Without them music is bland.
@@Alexagrigorieff It worked without for Palestrina.
Simon Sechter the worst composer in history? Boy, you need to study Lorenzo Perosi's Piano Concerto.
there is way more incompetent stuff out there than Sechter. What drives me crazy about Sechter is that the voice leading and counterpoint is so perfect and even beautiful but then he just runs around in circles like a hamster on a wheel. It's worse because in some ways he is so much better. Maybe "most disappointing" would be a better way to put it.
Or his Piano Quintets #1 and #2. Dull as dishwater.
And heaven help us, there's a new CD out with his #3 and #4. I'll pass. It's sad ... I love piano quintets, but the man who apparently wrote more of them than any other composer in history was ... Lorenzo Perosi.
Just checked it. Not very remarkable but still listenable. The vast majority of the reactions to the recording were also enthousiastic.
@@classicallpvault To be sure, the PC is a low point even in Perosi's work. But it IS a low point, not so much hilariously bad (which would be interesting at least) but just so, so mind-numbingly dreary. David Hurwitz has another, equally worthy candidate, by the way: ua-cam.com/video/66aIdmhXnQs/v-deo.html&pp=ygUdaHVyd2l0eiB3b3JzdCBwaWFubyBjb25jZXJ0b3M%3D
@@bomcabedalThat's an exaggeration. Lorenz's piano music contains some interesting passages that sound very interesting but strange. The orchestration is also strange, but it obviously doesn't fall under the definition of bad, a different category, plus you have to make allowances for the time of composition - the 20th century. Compared to all the dissonances of the time, it's good.
Yes, they are generally meaningless works, disjointed phrases, but they are interesting. I don't know why he didn't format it well, the material itself is interesting, but without processing (or he processed it that way on purpose)
I can only imagine what Glen Gould would have done with this.
He would have gone "Bum, bada bum, bum, baahhhh..." all the way through it.
Pecked at it nonsensically then had a pseudo intellectual discussion about it for 45 minutes.
@@1fattyfatman All I know is that he was a whole lot better player than myself even though his humming was really annoying.
@@tomfuller5585😂
If you look around youtube for Secther, you'll see he got reviewbombed by people who have just seen this video. The highly intelligent crowd.
In this regard, teaching music is no different from teaching sports.
Many of the most brilliant and successful professional sports coaches are mediocre athletes. Sechter might have been an average composer, but he was a brilliant music theorist and composition teacher. And that is what he considered himself to be.
Not a very flattering performance, and even if I am unsure about the merits of the fugue or Sechter (who I did not know), I hardly think this fugue deserves such harsh criticism. Played with feeling on a decent in-tune instrument, I feel it could be beautiful.
I like it quite a lot
it is very muted, as in not a lot of relative major noises
it is apt for mourning.
the fugue subject feels "cut short" halting occasionally, mirroring Schubert's early death
One only wished J.S.Bach were there to have written The Art of Fugue based on that Schubert fugal theme, and one wonders about the possibilities... endless.
One only wished…
I've something for you: passacaglia, 44 variations, cadenza and fugue on the theme of Schubert's unfinished Symphony by Godowski. A gorgeous beautiful work that can replace what we miss
You can be be the grand master of communicating the technique even when not possessing the art. He just needed others to add that.
Sheesh, after that long build-up, I was expecting far, far worse. I thought it was fine!
Thank you for this! I appreciate that you so clearly highlight what makes a fugue banal, despite its promise of greatness. Sechter's counterpoint may be ok, but the result adds up to less than the sum of its parts. By contrast, Bach's fugues in the WTC unfold with an inner drama-- through preparation of subjects, then combining them, or through episodic relief. Best of all, Bach plays with his subjects as he does with his listeners. I'll take bad Bach on kazoo and accordion over good Sechter played on a Steinway, any day.
Yep we're allll experts on how good the fugue could have been...and hardly one of us could write one ourselves. "Everyone's a critic" as they say.
Just as we're not allowed to say a movie is bad because we're not film directors. What complete nonsense.
You are correct, just as someone who does not drive can tell when a driver is poor. I have written dozens of fugues in my time and try to avoid writing one to "finish off" a quartet or symphony as they seem an obvious way out. I did not mind the Sechter piece too much, though there was a little box ticking near the middle.
@@cowaylon1681 I made no comment on you being "not allowed" to do something. Declare that you dislike various things to your heart's content. But it is my opinion that when someone has no vision of their own, no actual concept of how something is done, and no concept of how it can in fact be made better, it then comes off as pretentious to drag on endlessly about how horrible it is.
For instance, there would be nothing wrong with me saying, "I dislike the film the Godfather." It would be another for me to scathingly disparage the blocking, lighting, and cinematography choices of the film when I in fact, have no experience in any of those subjects.
"I dislike it" is a perfectly valid statement. "The fugue subject has infinite potential, all wasted by Sechter, and he is also the worst composer ever" Now that...Well, like I said. Everyone's a critic.
So it's fine to dislike something for no reason, but giving reasons for why you hate it is pretentious and wrong, unless you're an expert.
Good thing the guy speaking is a composer himself! Jesus Christ.
3:19 i remember reading that Brahms's habit was to get up early and write a fugue before breakfast.
I suppose that, no matter your talent level, the habit of practice does you good.
Really? I can swear it was AFTER breakfast.
The biggest problems are redundancy and lack of rhythmic impetus.
My thoughts exactly
Agreed. In Bach and others you’d get much more variety in phrase length too. All the entrances and statements are pretty square. At no point does the beat flip around or anything like that.
Seems like the kind of music an AI would write.
I thought so too
I thought so three
I thought so four
Nonsense. You're just saying that because of the video's title.
This work---which is obviously not good---is identical to any other mediocre fugue of the time period. It's not any more mechanical or dry than those composed by Sechter's contemporaries.
I´ve read and heard far more worse fugues than that.
Sounds like nice piece incredibly badly played. Sorry. Could you play some of your, of course much better pieces? Or do you just make UA-cam vids rubbishing others?
I think his playing is pretty good. You're just pissed off at him for his criticism of the composer. Sthu.
@@karllieck9064 no I just stated my opinion. It seems you have a different one, fine. But I am not "pissed off". After all he is just another UA-cam making a bit of money from other people's music. And it's OK by me too. Other people made much more money out of my my music than I did and I could not care less. Good on them👍
Fugue was not too bad. Interpretation could have been much better. Theme was beautiful, with a lot of potential, not developed. Was probably an excellent teacher -- and certainly not like a voice coach who cannot sing. (Credit for the theme must be shared with the authors of the clan's surname, but not the altitudes assigned -- and descending and ascending chromatic sequences have a logic and lyric of their own. But a fugue a day! Surely that puts any mortal at risk of becoming a Turing Machine! Or, maybe, like a photographer who wears a digital camera on his forehead taking nonstop snaps every waking second, one is guaranteed to catch a quota of a few chefs-d'oeuvres across a lifetime -- if anyone has the patience to sift and spot them...)
He was worse than you?! He wrote a fugue every day. That's some regime. By the way your piano needs tuning. - and a new set of hammers.
Thank you for sharing this paradoxical fact, a "bad" composer teaching an icon. It never feels entirely right to comment critically on a musician´s honest efforts, and personal aesthetics, but guilt aside, the most striking thing at first listening is the absence of modulation and drama, which the chosen subject and form sort of begs for. Composer Dave Bruce has a great video about avoiding the "beige" zone in a composition.
Actually, Maestro Cohen, I think you may disprove your thesis a little bit. It is not a bad piece and, in my opinion, does have some poignant harmonies and dissonances. And despite some rather unkind remarks by a few people hear the motivation of which I do not understand, you do play it with a lovely feeling. It should be taken as a given that the piano is not a perfect instrument and that this is a demonstration-type exercise rather than intended as a super-polished performance. The musical feeling that Mr. Cohen imbues the piece with, does, I feel, highlight some of the intrinsic merits of the piece itself, and touchingly uncovers the composer’s sentiment towards Schubert himself and his grief over the latter’s loss. The Picardy third ending is also a nice touch. Yes, everyone, it may not be Bach. But it is worth listening to and I, for one, appreciate Mr. Cohen’s sympathetic interpretation.
This Cohen guy is ridiculous if he thinks he is "the worst composer ever". I'm hoping he's being hyperbolic.
Of course. But the point is he’s also really good. Which is what makes him so bad.
The worst composer was probably Scriabin, maybe Myaskovsky.
@@bernabefernandeztouceda7315 Why do you believe Scriabin to be the worst?
@@scarf550 because he lived in his own fantasy world and couldn't write a coherent piece of music. And his tone was the trashiest
@@bernabefernandeztouceda7315 Fist off, "his tone was the trashiest" and "he lived in his own fantasy world" are both invalid and vague arguments, but have you even heard his earlier pieces? Most of his works were composed in traditional form, with traditional harmonies and melodies, nothing incoherent at all. If you wish to hear a coherent piece of music made by Scriabin, I suggest his early piano concerto, not his best work but it is very enjoyable.
Thanks for this! It may be the lack of rhythmic interest that makes it fall short as much as anything. Also, you're right about the rule rigidity for sure.
Well, it is good to know that apparently I am worse than the worst composer in history. That is at least a memorable distinction!
It doesn't seem to modulate adventurously but it's pretty damn good.
Tracks for me. No different than how a coach who can't run can help a good runner run faster, or how someone with an IQ of 180 was probably taught by people who were all not as smart as him.
I've always understood that Telemann was the most prolific composer in history. I've read or listened to a good many critiques and theses over the years that bashed and trashed certain composers. Indeed, bashing the work of certain composers goes in and out of fashion. Hindemith is a good example. He rewrote one piece of music, which led to a petulant onslaught against his music in university circles which thankfully seems to have run its course. Holst too was a victim of such nonsense. There is nothing to be gained from such negativity. All we learn is that you look down on this person's music, which is hardly an enlightening experience.
Perhaps Schubert derived something of interest from his single encounter with Sechter and it really doesn't matter about it because he died so soon after, but it was very different in the case of Bruckner, who wasted vast time at different stages of his career paying too much attention to what others (far less musical than he) said, did and thought. He set erroneous standards for himself that were founded on misconceived doubt and insecurity and he devoted sterile time in needless, misplaced deference to the views of lesser men. The fault, say, on Sechter's part was thereby in disingenuously taking money for lessons Bruckner did not need.. Eventually, the insecure composer literally ran out of time and died after spending a morning with pen and ink wrestling with the finale of the ninth symphony, which he could easily have completed had he not lost oceanic time along the way. "Oh no, Anton - I think you'd be better off with a C# in bar 349 !" "Oh do you think so? Perhaps I should rewrite the whole movement then.." That kind of thing. Any worse and he would have been asking the milkman whether to bring the trumpets in before the end of exposition. His designation of the 'early' D minor symphony as 'die Nullte' is ludicrous - it's a very good work, and the F minor symphony is not to be sneezed at either but he would have none of it. In the end, the pieces have become celebrated for being far better than he thought they were, and because they are numbers 0 and 00 ! We cannot all be Mendelssohns, Mozarts or Korngolds, but few composers have been so stricken with self-doubt, had such an inferiority complex as Anton Bruckner, yet the music expresses a rocklike eternal certainty because, I suppose, he was convinced that God had a hand in everything he produced at the same time as it was was giving him the willies that God might not entirely approve of the C natural instead of a C#, in bar 349.
In the end, we are lucky to have the eleven symphonies, the masses and so on but, from a great organist (as Bruckner was) very little music for his own instrument, which is bitterly disappointing. Schubert and Bruckner had symphonic successors whose work is accomplished and stimulating - Hans Gal, Felix Weingartner, and of course Franz Schmidt - in his case actually he wrote truly great music. In their symphonies, never less than satisfying writing, Schubert and Bruckner are united and Sechter becomes a mere footnote in history.
Actually, I love the introduction, and the outro is not bad. Could do without that stuff in the middle, though.
Not the most exciting fugue, but not terrible either.
I agree with you. Even Bach broke the rules which is why his music is so interesting, juicy, and wonderful. Music has to flow like a river. The best music does that.
When did Bach "break the rules?" WHAT rules?
@@grantco2Read some of the complaints about him using "strange harmonies." He also broke some of the registration "rules" regarding the organ.
@@karlrovey "Strange harmonies" don't mean rules were broken. English composers like Locke, Blow or Roseingrave did far stranger things... ;-)
@@grantco2 At that period in time, it did mean rules were broken.
I actually thought that was pretty good. Geez chill
think youve been too harsh. the piece works really well. thats the problem if you work in music whole life, you get over academic about it
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the fugue being played, other than it is probably "old school" compared to Schubert and Bruckner. Those throwing stones should be willing to prove their abilities to do better.
I quite like it actually. I think it definitely would sound better if orchestrated. Would be interesting to see the score.
totally agree. same here! :)
This is not surprising at all. Take sports coaches, for example. One can be a great coach and be an encyclopedia of theoretical knowledge about a sport, yet not necessarily have any skill at all in actually performing that sport.
I am not convinced by your choice of dynamics and articulation. They seem random and amateurish to me. I understand that you want to make your point though, fair enough. Reminds me of Glenn Gould making his point about what a bad composer Mozart allegedly was, only I think unlike you, he is totally aware and in control of what he is doing, while you are more or less sight reading.
Do we have any testimony as to the composer’s own practice when playing these pieces? Not the best fugue I’ve heard, but far from the worst! I suspect he expected anyone who played these pieces to do what you did…
Liked the fugue a great deal. Not Earth shattering music (just another opinion) and it certainly didn't "open up" but I wish I could write as badly.
I liked it - never heard of this composer , but i thought it sounded good
Did he write anything other than fugues? Maybe he was better at writing something else? I like his fugue. It’s interesting and played a little more melodically at the beginning would sound even nicer. It’s a lot like music in the Liturgical Organist series that I often used for filler prelude music.
An amazing feat in view of the enormous possibilities of the theme. Intelligence without musical imagination. One wonders what Schubert might have done with it. Thanks!
A true tragedy is that Sechter had assigned Schubert to write a fugue on this theme and only wrote his own version because Schubert died before doing the assignment
Schubert’s sketch exists I think.
Then just play a bit more inspired, my goodness. I would say that the worst composers in history are something like Ludovico Einaudi, Hans Zimmer or Steve Jablonsky.
I've heard two Schubert symphonies and they're excellent (8th and 9th).
I listened to one Bruckner symphony and thought it was horrible
I agree with you that this piece fails to achieve what Zechter clearly had in his heart (or at least heard in his head), i.e., to compose like J.S. Bach, in this case something along the lines of the B Minor P&F from the Well Tempered Clavier--a quixotic notion, to say the least. But that just makes me sad for him rather than contemptuous. After all, he did tutor Schubert and Bruckner. However, it is incredibly interesting to hear this composition, which must have predated Mendelssohn's conducting of the B Minor Mass, which is usually held up as the start of the Bach "revival." Clearly, JSB had been exerting profound influence at the lower frequencies for years, even if only among the lucky few.
Check out the music of Johann Phillip Kirnberger, Bach's most famous pupil and well-known writer and theorist of music. It sucks!
Nobody can teach a person how to compose an immortal melody. Thats a talent that can only come naturally.
Nothing in music comes naturally. Everything comes from practice, dedication and experience. Writing great melodies is no exception.
The truth is clearly somewhere in-between. Some composers, like Mozart and Rachmaninoff intuitively wrote the most amazing melodies even as children with hardly any musical training. But on the other hand, it is definitely something that can be learned, too.
I agree. I know people who can write musical notes on paper like me and you writing a letter but yet can't pen a tune. If having knowledge of Harmony and Counterpoint is all you need to write music, dedication and experience then most composers would have been turning out great tunes forever but it did and does not happen because you either have the gift or you don't.
No, you can learn that skill but it's harder to some than to others. Even a great melody writer like Chopin learned this skill through practice. His childhood compositions don't come anywhere close to his late works like the Barcarolle or the set of opus 59 Mazurkas. It's even possible to 'crack the code' how to write melodies like Chopin and there's even tutorial videos about this on UA-cam.
It involves analysing his melodies and deriving a formula from it. For instance, what are the maximum intervals between two notes? How do groups of notes tend to be grouped together? What keys does he modulate to and in what way does he alter the chords to create more dissonant harmonies? Where is the centre of gravity of a musical phrase supposed to be? How does he turn a simple scale up or down into something more interesting by taking 'detours' back down (or up) and so on.
A good set of ears comes naturally. Developing musical skills and putting those ears to good use is a learning process.
Listen to the last movement of Beethoven's 1st Symphony and marvel at how magnificent and witty music about a simple scale is - immortal
"The worst composer in history?" Really? Yes, he might have been a very mediocre composer, though I know of hundreds and possibly thousands of other past composers that would easily beat him to that "award of mediocrity." As a former professor myself of theory and orchestration, I can say with confidence, that Sechter was just another example of a teacher that could teach, though not compose sublime music of his own. Like Schoenberg, and other past composers that were also teachers, he was probably a good mathematician with his understanding of theory, though did not possess the soul of a true artistic composer. As a follower of the First Viennese School of tonality, when I had to teach the music of Schoenberg (and other atonal or serial composers to my former students), I used to cringe, and make funny faces that my students couldn't see, while my back was turned towards them....Ha! ... Peace and Love! 🎅🎄🎁🎄🎅
Schoenberg has a soul as big as Beethoven, atonal music is gorgeous, just open your ears.
I can't fathom why you would waste time trying to convince people that he was the worst composer.
I was thinking this music is erotique and sensuous.
Well, it was just a standard fugue. There was nothing especially bad about it. It would have sounded much better on an organ. The question is, who will now record his complete works?
In my humble opinion the only fugue comparable to the genius of Bach. Is the fugue in the final movement of
Bruckner's 5th.
Reminiscent of some compositions by Reger..
at least Reger wasn't afraid to modulate.
@@warrencohen8246 True..
But Reger was actually a great composer. He could write incredibly complex music based on very simple ideas and was a master of counterpoint and very adventurous in his use of harmony. The man also had a terriffic sense of humour, once writing to a critic: 'I am in the smallest chamber in my house and have your review in front of me. Soon, it will be behind me!'
Loads of people, myself included, have played Sechter's music because he completed many of Mozart's unfinished contrapuntal works. He does not do such a bad job, though one cannot help wonder where Mozart would have taken the music. On the other hand maybe Mozart did not complete the works because he was dissatisfied with how it was working out (alternatively he did not bother to finish them because he considered that what followed was implicit).
It makes me think of The Musical Offering. Take a few notes and make a masterpiece from them.
The chromaticism reminded me of it as well.
Still better than most if not all modern contemporary “composers”
I didn't hate it. This is a long ways from the worst composer in history, though I can see how it could have been transcendent and wasn't.
I've heard worse ... a lot worse!
Not so bad fugue. Thank you for the music!
Worst composer in history? Oh geez. That guy will lose the "worst composer" contest to any of many dozens of 20th Century composers. I studied with a "composer" who was producing electronic bleeps and bloops con dancer-in-black-tights as if that were some stunningly novel experiment.
A fair test of any composer and his or her music is "Would you want to hear that again? Would you want to hear other pieces by that composer?" That is not a naive or unreasonable test. Schecter could win that decision against numerous century-later composers.
Did Schecter ever publish anything? He doesn't appear on IMSLP and I thought even the most trivial 19th Century composers could be found there. Maybe he didn't take this as seriously as we think "composers" ought to do. 5000 fugues? He's tossing these off like most of us would do a crossword puzzle. Maybe he didn't intend greatness with these, maybe he just wanted to test out an idea.
Here's a mind game. If you transcribed this for the church organ, gave it to a master organist, and told him/her that this was a lesser-known piece of J. S. Bach, do you really think this artist would be able to recognize it as an inferior work?
Sonata 821D "Arpeggione" by Schubert is absolut perfection.
You performed this piece as if you where competing for the title of the worst pianist in history. And YOU are going to criticize someone that Schubert decided to go to for a lesson?
What a ridiculous comment.
5th grade piano lesson
I'm pretty sure you had the sheet music upside down. Rookie error!
One thing I've learned by listening with a modicum of intelligence to film scores, etc., is that:
a fugue subject always sounds like a fugue subject.
An example that comes to mind, offhand, is John Williams's Jaws score, at the point where the Fourth-of-July tourists arrive.
Sechter instructed his pupils that they must give up composition entirely for the full length of their studies with him. Bruckner wrote almost nothing for those 5 years he was under Sechter.
Bruckner's study was mostly by correspondence and Sechter wrote to him to ask him not to work so hard: presumably the instructor was being bombarded with exercises by the pupil and had an awful lot more marking to do than he was used to!
Bruckner became the inheritor of Sechter's mantle in terms of teaching of harmony and counterpoint and Sibelius applied to become his pupil in Vienna, a situation which never came to pass because Bruckner was in poor health by that time and had scaled down his teaching commitments.
Fritz Kreisler was unimpressed by Bruckner's classes: I think he found the approach too strict for his liking.
I didn't find this too boring - at least least not the melody. Perhaps the rhythm was a little dull. It did plod along a bit.
Watch out when you use the word pedagogue or pedagocical in America. I once did in a letter to a department at work and was advised to replace it with another word because the one I was using was reminiscent of child molestation. A true story.
I haven't heard of Sechter before. Thank you for the introduction.
The piece does not live up to its potential, perhaps. Or, could be considered a decent _sketch._ I liked it --again, thanks to your effort.
Come on, be honest...this sounds identical to any other mediocre fugue of the period. Cohen's hyperbole is hardly merited.
What I hear is a fugue in mostly Bach style. But not with the quality of that. not bad not good. So yes indeed dull. Quite a lot of composers has written like that. But it is not romantic music in any way (maybe except just before the end). So there is a reason why no one knows him today
So Do I. And it makes sense that the music wasn’t deep, if he wrote this practically as an exercise everyday. No mistakes, taking no chances. Historical master but in any way not an innovator. That’s why he was so good at what he did, being a Teacher. Like many studio musicians today, perfectionism is prohibiting creativity.
It needs to have some more interesting rhythmic development. Harmonically it's lovely, but very little imagination has gone into the rather mundane rhythmic choices.
One can't deny a certain intriguing quality about it.
Hmmm. I think that Sechter was a better composer than Beethoven’s counterpoint teacher, Johann Albrechtsberger..
It’s rather unfair to demonstrate poor composition with a deliberately poor performance.
This piece is smart. Takes a few rounds and you'll get it. It is a hamster-wheel but every turn it makes, it is more. not less - good.
Yeah, it doesn't go anywhere. Could be titled "Sitting at the airport terminal gate waiting for your plane to be cleared to fly by the airline's mechanics only to be told after the wait that the flight has been canceled."
Despite your expressive efforts I had to give up trying to discover the hidden treasure in it. What strikes me is that it is so distanced, uninvolved and not at all reminiscent of Schubert.
To be fair to Sechter, his fugues seem to have been more intended as writing exercises than pieces to be performed. He tried to write at least one every day and at that tempo even the greatest composers is bound run dry. Even Telemann wouldn't have been able to keep up with that tempo of composing and keep a consistent high quality. The fact that Diabelli actually published some of these pieces - well, there's nothing Diabelli wouldn't do for money.
Must have high standards if this is the worst composer in history. Not inspired for sure, but not bad.
I'm not sure Sechter is the worst composer in history. Based on that fugue. it does sound a bit monotonous, primarily because the leading voices remain in the same tessitura. I do hear that you are trying to play sympathetically, but I think more could be made of the interpretation.
The piece of music is quite well composed. However you are playing it is just terrible. Hoping for your sake that you are not a pianist.
Having one lesson with someone is not indicative of any meaningful connection.
Fascinating. I did not know this connection between Schubert and Bruckner. Also, "exceedingly pregnant" ?? (3:59) -- I lost it🤣.
The music did not develop, it permutated.
The problem is that after Bach’sons the music turned from counterpoint to verticality
And very few music pieces were still based on these patterns
And it is common that bad composers but good technicians of music transmitted their knowledge to good composers
Some of the best-hitting instructors in baseball weren't successful hitters. You can teach technique, but you can't train reflexes.