I had not got on with Schumann. Then, at the age of 30, I turned on my TV to watch Horowitz, at the age of 83, give a live 1986 concert from Moscow. His performance of Traumerei brought tears to my eyes. The KZfaq video still moves me.

Always liked Schumann's orchestral works. My favorite is the KONZERTSTUCK FOR FOUR HORNS AND ORCHESTRA, OPUS 86. Now with the coming of the compact disc, it's heard more often than it use to be. Thanks, Dave...

The first time I was captivated by Schumann's music was when, as a child, I heard the piano piece "Träumerei" from Kinderszenen op 15. The music had that special introspective feeling that felt so timeless and universal.

My first encounter with Schumann's music was a Supraphon recording of the Fantasiestücke op12 and the Waldszenen performed by Sviatoslav Richter. It appealed to me immediately. That was almost fifty years ago. He has been one of my very favourite composers ever since (and Richter one of my very favourite pianists). Thank you for including him in one of your "discovery" talks. He is one composer whose music I will never tire of listening to.

Schumann is an abject lesson in “keep on listening.” I too had learned from my teachers that Schumann was an inept composer and I avoided him. One day when I was 20, I turned on the radio and was greeted by an unfamiliar orchestral work that was among the most beautiful things I’d ever heard. Turns out it was the slow movement of Schumann’s 2nd. From that moment on, I sought out the Schumann symphonies and they have become beloved works in my personal listening repertoire. I’ve conducted the 1st and the 4th and look forward to doing the other two. This served as a broader lesson in the relative value of “received wisdom.”

My own Schumann journey went from indifference to love in a single concert at the Ravinia Festival one year. His 4th symphony. Something in the Schumann tonal palate has since always appealed to my ear. And a friend gave me an LP of his 'Spring' symphony which sealed the deal. In his piano music, there is always a sense for me of a mind 'working out' with great deliberation, as opposed to the seemingly more facile creations of his pal Mendelssohn (and I am not advocating for either as being better). Chopin had the better of what they both could produce on the keyboard, but still, the Schumann voice is unmistakable, and at his best the equal of anyone. So, once all that can be held against him is acknowledged, the symphonies in particular, his musical language speaks to me with pleasure and a unique savor as great as any other composer. For whatever reason, his symphonies to me are as great as any, and perhaps better than most (certainly than much of Bruckner for example, great as he could be. I feel often Bruckner drones, while Schumann speaks succinctly). Somewhat like my feeling for the symphonic sound world of Berwald, it is a musical voice that sings to my peculiar musical engrams! But it certainly is a process as you say; my antipathy for Franck does not preclude acknowledging his genius, just highlights the limits of my own particularly evolved musical soul, its possible failings, and the need for further evolution!

I had two profoundly formative Schumann experiences that hooked me from the age of 9-10; getting the Bernstein NYP set of the complete symphonies as a birthday gift, and hearing the Fantasy, Op. 17 in the Horowitz Historic Return at Carnegie Hall 2 LP set. He has remained in my top echelon of composers ever since.

For most of my life, Schumann was "that quirky guy who came between Schubert and Brahms." But four recordings of genius revealed Schumann to me: Sviatoslav Richter's 1956 FOREST SCENES, where he reveals powerful emotions under the cool, tender surface. (This turned me on to Richter, as well!) George Szell's two Cleveland recordings of the 'Second' Symphony (1952 & 1958). Such unique "oddball" passion and feeling, such a "green" spring festival after a long winter. At least, that's what the MUSIC revealed to me. (Eventually I found Szell's other Schumann symphonies, and of course the Sawallisch Dresden set.) And if Szell "tinkered" with the orchestration, he did so in a way which was absolutely aligned to the grain of the music. The 1963 Bernstein/Julliard disc of the Piano Quintet. I admit this is getting a little "personal."...When I was 19, one summer morning after a very rough night after a bad, hopeless week, my radio alarm clock awakened me with the first movement of this performance. All I can say is, it was a kind of turning point...The Universe wasn't such a bad place, if a day could begin like THIS.

Very interesting! Thank you for sharing your very personal Schumann journey. I always felt very close to Schumanns music. It always struck a chord in me. For me it was his fourth symphony and chamber music with piano (quartet and quintet) that opened up the doors. But it was the oratorio works (Das Paradies und die Peri the Faust - Szenen) and the opera (yes! he wrote an opera Genoveva! very odd and probably impossible to put on stage satisfyingly, but still one of my favorite pieces in the world!) that made me fall in love with his music. It feels like he had no filter when he wrote music, his thoughts and feelings land directly and raw on paper and we as musicians are more forced to think about it than with let's say Mendelssohns or Brahms' music (which doesn't mean, we shouldn't..), because it's so much harder to make it sound the same as it sounds inside of us when we look at the score. And that is true for his piano music as well as his orchestral music, which is why I am not sure he was a bad orchestrator per se. I would argue, it is just so much harder to have 50 to 80 musicians bringing one unpolished diamond to shine than one pianist. That's the best metaphor I can come up with right now, I apologize..

I had the extraordinary good fortune of hearing Rubinstein perform Carneval live--which he recorded I am convinced he recorded brilliantly. I can still vaguely hear echoes in my mind of the concluding march.

Like a lot of beginning piano students, I was given pieces from his Album for the Young (as a real tot, even being dragooned by my teacher to play the ubiquitous "Merry Farmer" in the window of the local Sherman & Clay piano store!). I don't think I felt one way or another about the music, but when I was eventually given Kinderscenzen, THAT got my attention. I thought it was wonderful. By turns dreamy, fiery, funny, mysterious. I loved it, and started to look for recordings of other works, the first being the Op 17 Fantasy, which knocked me sideways--that passionate, soaring, yearning 1st movement, the unbridled energy of the 2nd, and then the finale, just so jaw-droppingly gorgeous, a whole other world of almost inexpressible feeling. I didn't know what "innig" meant at the time or what "sehnsuch" meant, but that's what the music was, what it had, what it evoked. I was hooked good & proper and have never looked back.

Probably the only work of his that I’ve given much consideration would be the Konzertstück for four horns. A fun piece, but my God, talk about virtuosic demand; I think it was considered unplayable in its day. In some of the horn sections I’ve been a part of, it was a running gag. Let’s play something simple and relaxing like Konzertstück. “The sound of the horn is the soul of the orchestra.” - R. Schumann

As I commented after the Elgar discovery video, my introduction to basic classics was a process of assimilation from quite early wartime childhood coming out of my parents' box of 78s which contained one basic work from core composers, e.g. Beethoven 5, Handel's Water Music, Bach's Toccata and Fugue, Schubert's Unfinished, etc. I don't recall any Schumann in that box, so I must have gone through some form of subsequent "discovery". Most probably it started with his Piano Concerto, which according to conventional wisdom at that time was his only work involving at orchestra not marred by clumsy orchestration. The real eye opener was a coupling of Schumann's 4 and Mendelssohn's Italian performed by Klemperer and the Philharmonia. Here there were a strong, if measured, rhythmic pulse and transparent textures without loss of Romantic expression. Soon after that I heard Fischer-Dieskau in Dichterliebe. From then I had no restraint in seeking out more of Schumann's music and now regard it in many ways as the essence of German romanticism.

Thank you Dave, yes! I find I agree with everything you say here. When I was introduced to classical music by a schoolfriend in my teens (1973); I never looked back. I have always loved piano concertos and sonatas and of course Schumann's was one of the first. I have loved it ever since, then played a bit of Beethoven, on to listening to Chopin, Liszt, Rach, Prok, etc. Schumann's piano writing looked totally unapproachable and ridiculously awkward. But just recently I came across Davidsbundlertanze played by Marta Czech and thought this was beautiful. I must get into his piano music more! Thank you for the encouragement.

Schumann’s music is intimate and takes on his own language. Probably a lot connections with Schubert and Beethoven, to some degree Bach. But he has taken his own way to express his psychodrama. His music tends to take longer time to understand as a lot of vocabularies come from his earlier works, Schubert’s works, his Davidsbunde or literature inspirations. Thus, they are difficult to understand but once you begins to crack the nutshell you appreciate how honest and truthful this composer has been.

The one and only A+ on a paper I got in college (American Conservatory of Music, now defunct) was on Robert Schumann. I didn't really like Schumann that much, although I didn't dislike him at the time, I later grew to dislike most of Schumann. He didn't "do it" for me, with the exceptions of Carnaval, Lieder, and Scenes from Childhood. But I have to say, I heard his Violin Concerto a couple decades ago and I love it. It's rarely played. A cellist friend rolled his eyes at that one, saying I liked a violin concerto by "Crazy Bob" so I must be crazy as well. The Overture, Scherzo & Finale is played often on our classical radio station, WFMT, as is the Konzertstuck for 4 Horns & Orchestra and the Symphonies. You nailed it when you said Schumann is "not easy". He is not.

Schumann is a composer who I’ve recently “come around” to - well, certain works of his anyway. I still struggle with most of his highly-regarded solo piano music, with a few exceptions (the C major Fantasie and the Gesange der Frühe). The symphonies are fine works, but I don’t find myself itching to hear them on a regular basis. To me, most of Schumann’s most engaging work lies in his wonderfully crafted and characterful chamber music, above all the Piano Quintet, Piano Quartet, Piano Trio no. 1, String Quartet no. 3, Violin Sonata no. 2, and Five Pieces in Folk Style for cello and piano. I also have a real soft spot for his “oddball” concertante works such as the Introduction & Allegro appassionato (op. 92), Introduction & Concert Allegro (op. 134) - both for piano and orchestra - and the tremendously fun Konzertstück for four horns. And “Das Paradies und die Peri” was a surprisingly wonderful discovery for me, as was his very little-known Requiem. So, in general, the less well-known the Schumann work in question, the more I tend to enjoy it, lol. I’ve never understood why “Carnaval”, “Papillons”, etc. are so much more highly regarded than most of the works I mentioned….I guess because they revolutionized piano writing in some way, but I care much more about the intrinsic quality of music than how “groundbreaking” it was.

A widowed neighbor lady for whom I mowed the lawn, raked leaves and shoveled snow when I was a teenager often invited me in for refreshments. She played piano and had a collection of classical records, mostly piano music. One day she put on an LP of the Schumann Piano Concerto, played by Wilhelm Backhaus, with the VPO, conducted by Günter Wand. It was (and still is) a great recording, which turned me on to both Schumann and Backhaus, both of whom I've enjoyed ever since.

You know, if you ever run out of classical music to talk about it would be a lot of fun to hear you venture into rock. I have a feeling it goes way beyond ELP !

As a boy I had a record with (I know it today 😂) a crude mixture of classical pieces on it. There was a Chorus fom Messiah beside Beethoven's overture to "Die Ruinen von Athen" and Bach's 3rd Brandenburg concerto 😅. And there were two spooky piano pieces played by Badura-Scoda, called "Aufschwung" and "In der Nacht" from Fantasiestücke op.12 by Schumann. And I got addicted to them, trying to play them at the piano (without so much fortune), and was looking for other pieces of this composer. First the Cello-concerto struck me, when I heard it in concert and later, as a singer, the "Eichendorff-Liederkreis" was an important part of my repertoire. The emotional atmosphere of Schumann's stays being very dear to me and I would say he's my favourite romantic composer.

I love symphonies 1-3. Faschingschwank aus Wien is my favorite piano piece by him (never mind the title). And the Canon in b minor is a beautiful, moving organ piece. It is absolutely worth listening to music to find out what other people think is so wonderful. How else will you expand your range of appreciation? Some of my favorite music bored me for years until I finally got them.....Don Carlo, Simon Boccanegra, Cosi fan Tutte, Missa Solemnis, many Schubert songs etc. It's worth it, even tho it doesn't always work. E. G., I never cared for Bruckner except for symphonies 4 & 7.

I should have heard this one first. Thank you maestro :-)

Forty years ago I was bowled over by Dichterliebe and Frauenliebe und leben, which are still to me the pinnacles of classical song in any language. Fifteen years ago I discovered the piano music, and ten years ago the chamber and orchestral music, so really the whole of my adult life has been a process of discovering new and wonderful music by Schumann. Other composers have been a more constant part of my life (Ives, Bach, Beethoven, Britten) but none has given me such a continuous sense of new and wonderful discovery as Schumann.

I liked listening to Schumann's piano music as a kid but I hated playing it because of the fingerings. It seemed like more than any other composer he wanted you to bend and twist your fingers in such unnatural ways. It felt angry to my fingers like he hated me. As a listener, I've always preferred his more radical compositions that seem to break with tradition. Cordot's recordings of the piano works are essential. I like his non-piano pieces, but the core of his repertoire is the piano. For me the essential piece is Carnival. It captures the most of him.

Hi Dave, I saw what you said about Schumann's Songs of Dawn and I went and listened to them for the first time ever and thought they were really cool, and saw some stuff on the internet by experts who said that late Schumann is bad, so I went back and listened to them again and thought they were really cool, and then saw something else on the internet by experts who said that late Schumann is not worth listening to, and went back and listened to them again and thought they were really cool, and then saw something else on the internet by experts who said that with late Schumann his mind was not up to the task, and then next day I went back and listened to them again and thought they were really cool, and I guess I will always fall short of the circle of people with highly superior musical taste.

My enjoyment of the Konzertstuck for 4 Horns eventually led me to the Gardiner box on Archive, which opened me up to several fine pieces I wasn't very familiar with. There's a lot to explore, for sure.

I'm still on the ground of mostly indifference. I've heard some of Schumann's most recognizable piano music (Fantasiestucke Op. 12, the Carnival, Kinderszenen) - it's OK, I wouldn't say I dislike it, there are some parts I really like, but doesn't do much for me overall. The Piano Quintet Op. 44 is another story. That's a masterpiece I absolutely adore.

You're opinions of Schumann are diametrically opposite of mine. Schumann is the most literary composer in history perhaps. His early piano music is inspired by E.T.A Hoffman and Jean Paul writings directly. If one has no familiarity with the fantasy elements off Hofmann a work like Kreisleriana is not going to make as much sense. Other works like Carnival, which is less overtly literary, is bi-polar. The moods change so fast and it will alienate listeners. I suggest those new to Schumann start with either the Piano Quintet, which is heavily modeled on Schumann's second trio, or the Piano Concerto, which is uneven but also heroic in tone. After that move on to some of the piano music like Davidsbundler Dances or Forest Scenes. I'm also not a lieder person but his songs are wonderful.

Great talk thanks! I actually enjoy pretty much everything I've heard of his, which to my ears does not seem especially 'difficult' (in, say, the manner of Bach or late Beethoven). But I do find him enigmatic and erratic For instance, what's up with the year of lieder, followed by the year of chamber music? Also, the man wrote one opera, which some critics so admired as to hail him the German rival to Wagner, and never wrote another. Setting aside his romanticist madness, I tend to think of him as a critic who composed, rather than a composer who criticized. And yet his famous anointing of Brahms, while justified in hindsight, seems to me a sad self-renunciation, in as much as Schumann was in his mature prime at the time.

Do you (or any of your other commenters) have any recommendations for, say, recordings of the Rhenish symphony where the conductor does and does not solve the orchestration problems posed by Schumann? It would be really helpful for me to hear a direct comparison of two recordings in order to hear the difference between the way the conductor succeeded/failed, respectively to solve Schumann’s orchestration problems. I figure that’s easier and quicker than finally reading Walter Piston’s book on orchestration that I bought 45 years ago and have yet to read.

I enjoyed your launching into your domestic history! Interesting that this episode does not involve a particular work or "Aha" moment. I have to admit to an odd attachment to Schumann myself. For me, it's the lieder that really touches me, and after that it just this and that: some of the piano works (Davidsbundlertanze above all) and some chamber works. I wonder if we have here that issue you've mentioned before: a composer who wrote too much? The sheer volume of piano works is overwhelming, and I, too, find much of it tiresome. In his tragic case, though, it wasn't from composing too late in life (though it's certainly true his mental deterioration affected his ability somewhat.)

Thanks, Dave This is obviously a very personal story for you. There is a certain intensity about Schumann’s best works that is quite hard to describe, but if you can’t tune into that then that’s ok. It’s most obvious in the songs. I sing, or did, so that’s why I know that there is that unusual thing going on.

My first encounter with Schumann was his “Chopin” from Carnaval. It was played often for dramatic effect on The Loretta Young Show (1953-1961), an anthology drama series. He certainlly out-Chopined Chopin in my opinion! My favorite pop culture use of one of his tunes is “Ein Jüngling liebt ein Mädchen” from Dichterliebe, the melody for the Ultrabright Toothpaste jingle.

Paradise und die Peri!! (Kreisleriana is my fave though)

I agree that Schumann is difficult, and he was a difficult man after all. As someone who got into classical music through the piano, I probably had an easier time getting into his music than other people, but it certainly wasn’t love at first hearing. As you said, he didn’t have the kind of poetics and melody that Chopin did, or the flashiness of Liszt, and so his music just didn’t sit with me immediately and I just didn’t get it. But then at some point it just ‘clicked’, like a switch, and what did it was actually some of his simplest music, Kinderszenen. All of a sudden I heard such beauty and poetry that it felt like whiplash, and I’ve fallen in love with a lot of his music since then. It’s still not all there, mind you. I still don’t get some of his music (I still don’t like his piano concerto, for instance), but what I do get has become some of my favorite, and his Humoreske is currently something I’m obsessed with.

Schumann is not among my favorite composers, but I discoreverd him when I heard some of his pieces played by the great Nelson Freire.

Schumann's solo piano music frankly bores me, but I love the lieder, any of the Heine settings especially. The two middle symphonies I adore (the slow movement of the second is one of the most beautiful mvts in 19th century music.) Manfred, of course. And despite the rather sappy story, Paradies und die Peri is great fun. I believe the Op.44 Quintet may be the best introduction to chamber music for newbies.I never had a problem with that Schumann. I love the piano concerto but the cello concerto is beyond dreary. And his one opera, Genoveva, which I've heard at least three times is, I'm afraid, quite hopeless. It may be the worst opera ever written by any one of the acknowledged great composers. Quite a distinction that!

Given your family history, Dave, I understand why it has taken you a long time to warm up to Schumann. Thanks for sharing that story with us. As for me, Schumann's music spoke to me from the very first. My father was particularly fond of the Piano Concerto, so I was exposed to that work from earliest childhood. A bit later, after my parents' divorce, my father allowed us to take a fair number of albums from his large collection of 78'. Among them was Szell's mono recording of Schumann's "Spring" Symphony, which enthralled me at the time and still does. Then during my high school days I took out Bernstein's Columbia Schumann cycle from the local College library. It eas love at first hearing, and at the time I was unaware of any controversy concerning Schumann's orchestration (Szell had retouched the orchestration, but Bernstein played the original). Later, in college, my fellow piano students, struggling to master Schumann's music for that instrument introduced me to that genre through countless student recitals. (My technique was not up to most of Schumann's demands). I did have to accompany voice students in Dichterliebe and Frauenliebe und Leben, and I think the struggle soured me on his lieder somewhat. Only in recent years have I come to appreciate his chamber music, which I now enjoy as much as the Symphonies. All this to say that my love of Schumann's music has rarely wavered over many decades. Why? I cannot tell you.

I think instrumentalists must receive Schumann differently than vocalists. Vocalists love Schumann. He is kind of like the German Bellini. His lieder is more romantic than Schubert’s, and is wonderful to sing.

Schumann was a tough sell for me, too. Although the first piece I heard was "The Happy Farmer," I was in the same position in regard to the solo piano music. I also preferred the obscure piano pieces like the 4 Fugues on BACH. The famous song cycles didn't interest me, but obscure ones like Das spanisches Liederspiel did. I also enjoyed the chamber music and the piano concerto. The symphonies were never a problem (excepting the 4th), and indeed I prefer Schumann's symphonic cycle to Mendelssohn's. On the other hand, being a Cleveland boy and a Cleveland Orchestra headbanger, I listened to Szell's recordings. Like you, I am still trying to crack the Schumann piano music and the other concerti, but I've gradually come around to the song cycles. By the way, his Scenes from Faust (2nd version) is just incredibly interesting. I saw this live. As far as I know, however, only the first version is recorded.

Never really had a problem with Schumann - perhaps because I came to him relatively late (even after being familiar with Mahler). It was the Symphonies that got me hooked (the freshness and verve of the Spring 1st and the granduer of the Rhenish 3rd) and I never got hung up about his supposedly poor orchestration (you just need the right conductor). Then I went to the piano music - Kinderszenen, Carnaval. I personally find it easy to connect with Schumann's music than Brahms' but that's just me!

1. Oh mann, if the Schu fits. For years, I thought of him only as the 19th century composer who came chronologically and alphabetically after Schubert. 2. I no longer relish these thoughts after hearing his 'Rhenish', i.e., Third Symphony. 3. It seems that Clara Wieck was the light of his life and made him weak in the knees. 4. Poor guy, he had all the ingredients of a tormented Romantic composer: A. A piano virtuoso who pressed his fingers into debilitation. B. A lovely piano virtuoso wife whose performance fame eclipsed his and who was visibly adored by a younger composer. C. A skinny dip in the Rhine that was non-fatal, an outcome contrary to his intention. D. Dying of malnutrition and pneumonia in a mental asylum after self-referring himself for melancholia. 5. Perhaps one of the reasons for the relatively little esteem given to Schumann in comparison to his musical greatness is that his life was such a downer, resulting in people preferring not to think about him at all. Except for composing notable music in larger forms after losing his ability to play the piano, Schumann's biography contains no great public triumph over personal adversity, like how the deaf Beethoven conducted his Ninth Symphony at the 1824 Vienna premiere.

Dave, I love this series of "Discovery". I find it impressive that you are able to remember specific instances of discovery. For the most part, I don't think I recall the first time I heard a certain composer. I am able to remember the first time I heard specific works if they left an impression, but the existence of the composer I'm not as able to do. In fact, I would say that for me, I was likely familiar with the names of many composers for several years before ever having been exposed to their music. Two things struck me about this particular video. One is that you reference your love for rock music - or at least your appreciation of it, having grown up in that generation. I would be very interested to know (and I bet others would also) specific artists (or even albums) outside the concert music genre that left an impression on the young Dave Hurwitz as he formed his musical tastes and opinions. That would be a lot of fun and possibly informative to us. I think it's great that you don't have a "classical music snob" opinion of music that isn't "classical repertoire". I too leaped into music by means of the rock genre and I'm sure it in some way influences my taste in classical music. The other thing I made note of is that in a general way it seems that you don't gravitate strongly toward the Germanic composers - I would say that in addition to Schumann, you have also cited at times Bach and Brahms as composers whom you deeply admire and respect, but that aren't your natural first choice. I would even say after watching a plethora of your videos and reading your critiques throughout the years that even Beethoven is a composer that you in many ways respect more than adore. I'm just stating this because I think it's interesting to note how all these composers have a Germanic tinge - maybe a certain cerebral quality that trumps other aspects of music that you prefer. You may disagree with this assessment but at least this is how it comes across to me. One thing I will say is that it's hard to say Chopin is more "soulful" than Schumann when one considers the final movement of the Fantasie - possibly the most moving 10 minutes of piano writing ever put down on paper - among other great Schumann works - but there is a lyricism to Chopin that seems more relatable than Schumann at times. Anyway I love this series - keep em coming!

Schumann is definitely 'uneven', as they say. I imagine this is an artifact of his being bi-polar. As a general rule, however, I think his music gets better as you crank up the opus numbers.

Yes, a problematic composer for me as well. I recognize the brilliance of Schumann’s symphonies or their influence on other composers, but they simply do not capture my imagination or soul. Sounds like I’m far from alone in this regard. Perhaps I’ll give the Mahler re-orchestrations some time. The Shostakovich orchestration of the cello concerto is pretty darn good.

I am not convinced. Why make the effort to listen to a 'difficult' composer when there are lots of other easier (in this case more talented) composers offering the same thing? How many hours do I have to be bored so I can learn to agree with others? I like some of his piano music (Carnival) but I don't think they are anything special. His symphonies are tolerable but I could be listening to other greater symphonies instead.

Perhaps classical music pedagogy , prodigies and musical training could be a topic for one(or several videos) Music performance tends to run in families and maybe for good(practical) reasons. Non-musical families tend to devalue it ,and music performance is enormously expensive , time consuming and not very lucrative career wise. Sorry about your father though!