Ravel is not exactly underrated but is not recognized as the genius he was. The fact that he wasn't particularly prolific like Stravinsky makes many people think he's not so great after all. I remember a talk with one of my great uncle, he was a highly educated man, who had read a lot and had a respectable record collection, and I was a 11yrs old child full of entusiasm for classical music, So, one day, he ask me, "who is your favorite composer and why?". I answer "Mozart, because I love his tunes and his music is so perfect". He said, when you grow up, you gonna love Ravel and for the same reasons. He was right.

0:06 im glad you put Volodos perfomance bcs it's one of the best imo. He is so underrated

The valses nobles et sentimentales is the since piece by Ravel that I enjoy the original piano composition more than his orchestrated version.

What an exciting analysis! An absolute ear opener. Thank you

Subscribed. Excellent analysis of this work from my favorite composer. Very insightful and allows me to hear on another level. Great work! Much appreciated.

You’re too good, man! You can hear what others can’t, keep going!

Excellent work!! Thank you for such a concise and thoughtful explanation!!

Great to see Ravel getting credit for his innovations as a musical "scientist". Enjoyed this video very much.

Such an excellent analysis. Thank you from a huge fan of Ravel.

Saw this video by thanks to the youtube recommendation. Very pleasant video, thank you!!

skyler, this is so beatiful - and what a tribute to my dear, dear cousin, Jimmy. Your Grandpa Harley would be so proud of you. You definitely inherited his music creativity and sensitivity. Much love from MN - it's -12 degrees here this morning - Happy New Year!

Great analysis and video! Many thanks!!

Great analysis! Thank you. I love Ravel’s music. He was hard bop before hard bop was hard bop.

I feel exactly the same. I think that the harmonic niceties are more perceptible in the piano version. This also applies to « Le Tombeau de Couperin ». Ravel was an exceptional orchestrator. He knew how to go about the quasi innumerable possibilities of an orchestra. He could shape or mould the orchestral mass into stunning combinations of sounds and rythms, but when he decided to write piano music, it was piano music indeed. His art of piano writing led him to harmonic alloys whose complexity and spellbindingness cannot be so well renditioned by a combination of instruments as it can be by a piano alone. The fluidity of the musical sentences, the pearl-like quality of the sounds made possible by a piano result in a loss of character and charm when orchestrated. Make an experience : listen to the « Forlane » from Ravel’s « Tombeau de Couperin » in its piano version ; then turn to the orchestral version written by Ravel himself, and you’ll certainly be struck by the comparative impoverishment in terms of harmonic subtlety. We know that Ravel orchestrated some of his piano works for them to be choreographed and performed on stage by ballet dancers. It was for him a notable source of income. Many other composers did the same. But piano is piano, orchestra is orchestra. It’s quite true the other way round : I don’t particularly enjoy, say, « The Rite of Spring » transcribed for two pianos !

Love this! More please, especially on Ravel.

Great analysis. Thanks!

At 6:39 the A is still flat on the second beat making that chord a V7#9 just like the other chords on beat 2

Great choice in Volodos!

Thank you. Much appreciated

Wonderful. Thanks!

I'm not sure I had this thought before but your analysing the final passage of chords reminded me of the similarly daring chord sequence near the end of Petrushka, where you have major triads over chromatically ascending dominant 7ths to create crunching dissonances (it's one of a number of passages near the end where you can really hear the Rite to come, before that the work is largely diatonic and in the Rimsky Korsakov/Firebird mould). But both composers worked on those pieces at the same, so it must have been a case of two great minds thinking alike. I think Ravel is overshadowed by Debussy when it comes to people recognizing what an innovative composer he was; between the early 1890s and the breakdown of tonality by the Second Viennese school and the Rite of Spring a few years later, apart from Ives who worked in a vacuum and Bartok from 1908 those two were the most advanced composers anywhere at the time.

5:23 armonía simétrica similar a la que también utilizó en el pasaje de Ondine y que más tarde pasaría a ser denominada Coltrane changes. La verdad no tengo claro su origen pero es llamativa la búsqueda de ravel por la geometría y su relación con los intervalos y los estados emocionales sin un punto predeterminado de reposo ❤ muchas gracias por tu video

Great video! It would be nice to replay each passages after they are discussed

first bar is G11 to inverted d#9 if I got the dots so I don’t know what that is other than some weird modulation, with a lingering d thrown in, but on second repetition the d#9 turns into a diminished chord so that sounds more composed? I guess it’s true that the I V does provide a minimal foothold. 2:57 the melody first moves a tritone before settling into chromatic fourths, and left hand also starts with a tritone jump down, and as pointed out we have the I V in the bass again to give something to hold on to (down modulated a minor third to e minor)

Interesting video ! You might want to consider also the incredible harmonies in Le Gibet of Gaspard de la nuit ! It's like painting, with many superpositions, and the most poetic world coloring and driving the whole piece. Ondine also is not obvious at all. And Debussy too is soo interesting, consider Images ! And Stravinsky's Sacre du printemps :D

Wonderful analysis! I love playing the chords in the opening movement. You shed a lot of light on them, but there's still a certain amount of inexplicable magic, isn't there? I don't think it's possible to explain fully what Ravel does. The whole is greater than the sum of its part. Thank you for your insightful comments.

I read the opening a completely different way. I see the first two beats as a kind of D chord over a G pedal. The chord on beat 3 is really a chromatic passing chord between that first chord and the G6/9 on the downbeat of the second measure, which is one real tonic. It’s simply been shifted up an octave to make its quality more jarring. You could call the first chord a Dm13 over a G pedal, so to me it sounds like V -> I

Ravel is GENIUS!

Great video! I'm still curious about the descending fifths ascending fourths passage you analyzed, why are they in different octaves like that and the Bb is even doubled?? Sonorities man that is something I wanna understand more, hey if you could make a video talking about that I would watch the ever loving shit out of that bro

Wow ❤️

The opening is pretty similar to alborada del gracioso

4:36 This reminds me of David Benoit's Looking Over Eastlake intro.

Great video. Just checking though, we have an Ab at 6:41, no? Bb7#9?

That was Volodos! Amazing pianist, and certainly NOT underrated!

To quote Ethel Merman:" He's okay... if you like talent."

5:15 sounds jazzy

Painted some mean pallette.

did ravel have giant hands though😮

Ok but this should have been an hour long video highlighting quite...everything that's needed to say. great approach though!

So much clever narrating... Yet Debussy would surely come and say "quit your analizing bs. Its not about analisys, which leaves so much out anyway. Its about how it sound and how it makes you feel."

Until the cat came in, I thought that this was serious. I switched off.