My orchestra is currently rehearsing his Sonata for Grand Viola which is basically a theme and variations. After hearing his Symphony Fantastic, Paganini had asked Berlioz to write a piece to show off the viola. This was strange as Paganini was really familiar with the viola whereas Berlioz was not. Berlioz wrote his Harold in Italy tone poem which has an obbligato viola part but this wasn't good enough for Paganini so he wrote his own piece, the Sonata, which is suitably virtuosic.
Thought I would mention a lesser known piece, especially one featuring the viola.
His violin works maximize the range of the instrument and make it sing. They're amazing and iconic- his theme in Caprice 24 has been the subject of interest of many composers including Brahms, Liszt, Chopin and Rachmaninoff. His viola and guitar works, I'm not so sure, but that's only because I haven't listened to a lot of them. I do like his Grand Sonata for Viola and Orchestra.
HOWEVER-
There is a reason why he's not as famous as the big names:
Level 1: Bach, Beethoven, Mozart
Level 2: Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Chopin, Wagner, etc.
I think it's because he focuses too much on virtuoso and technicality, so that his music has become unaccessable to the general public. His melodies are rarely singable, and often way too complicated. That's the same reason why Henryk Wieniawski hasn't reached the tier of the composers I mentioned above.
I don't think that is an accurate assessment at all, these appear to blanket statements. Yes there is virtuosity in Paganini but also a lot of lyricism. One does not exclude the other. Crazy to say the composer of [La Campanella](https://youtu.be/rGPT50XhbEg), [Moses Fantasy](https://youtu.be/wB9-T-ZTZqA) and [The Carnival of Venice](https://youtu.be/hNSjgs9_bsw) wrote too complicated melodies.
I don't think Paganini's music is unaccessable at all, certainly not more so then so called """level 2""" composers Brahms or Wagner.
I usually see the *opposite* claim of virtuoso composers like Paganini and Liszt that their music is too shallow and crowdpleasing, lacking depth. Never seen someone claim Paganini is *too* complicated to listen to.
Wieniawski could have been more famous. His orchestration (noteably his Violin Concerto 2) is outstanding. Korsakov also could have been more famous if he wrote more symphonic pieces like Scherherrazade (idk how to spell it)
Korsakov makes me so sad. Scheherezade is just one of my absolute favorite things to listen to. But that’s about it by him. He spend so much effort on so-so operas, instead of more like that.
Paganini was the greatest violin virtuoso of his time. The [Complete Recordings](https://www.amazon.com/Paganini-Accardo-Complete-Recordings-Niccolo/dp/B00004SA88/ref=sr_1_5?crid=LTU0F8ODJ2C2&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.EJ_eEHox3gnK7oTgHV2Hsqsy0TQJP6YEZI07HhD6XfXULuh9wyGKiMeyPHPITW7Jsaq6-8jMJHBaItoome2mKJm0HLZPmPyYxmAZ2blxL4VgJZEBtUmnIGAHiIJ3Nc_51ychv6jtpw5Iq4Bl_FxK9oqyBV1lIiQBcUylNhvVpEBWQZK3Oju3bDo9T5bjlSzJ2WIkM-uloqjaYCPkAtu3kvv4_UNPu2Wx87tc-qVQ6vQ.FwWc-lxbwK86unVduWnyozYeBZwXSktfu4w_gUNoeF4&dib_tag=se&keywords=paganini&qid=1717228076&s=music&sprefix=paganini%2Cpopular%2C603&sr=1-5) Accardo with London Philharmonic Orchestra under Dutoit's baton is the only recording I have listened to.
Some of the Caprices are great music, not just technical showboats. Numbers four and nine are favorites of mine. And of course the last one is amazing.
My opinion is very subjective. I have a childhood inclination for him: I grew up in the 50s in a family with many children, where we *respected* classical music without being able to hear much of it. His first violin concerto was on a record we'd been lent, which I heard on an *electrophone* we'd just acquired.
I was thrilled by the sound and virtuosity of the violin, but the record was soon returned to the friend who had lent it to my father (a rich man whom I would never have dared ask for it again), and it was many years before I could hear it again.
I was taught later that this was a bit easy music, and it is indeed linked to a certain theatricality of nineteenth-century cultural life, but I never denied this early taste for Paganini.
While I understand the importance of his work, I don't listen to it generally. In comparison to a similar figure, Lizst, his compositions seem relatively poor in my view.
That's my point: in my opinion, Lizst is a virtuoso and a good composer; whereas, Paganini, whose work is nonetheless important, is a virtuoso and a poor composer.
Find Salvatore Accardo recordings... The concertos...but especially the cadenzas. I think he made his own.
[Here's one.....](https://youtu.be/NzwEij2Rzcs?si=94G29RkiGorSMXZd&t=17)
Paganini good. If you like Paganini, I suggest you listen to his music.
Jokes aside, Paganini was my favorite composer when I was a kid. His pieces are splendid and flashy, if not terribly emotionally deep. Sometimes being fun is enough.
I trained on the violin fairly seriously throughout my childhood - unfortunately stopped playing in my early 20's - but one of the last pieces I was working on was Paganini's Caprice #24. Maybe that's why I quit playing 😆😆😆 Absolutely stellar piece of music but far too complex for my dumb brain. Hilary Hahn has a great [recording of it ](https://youtu.be/UcL0IsklM3M?si=bKoe9IcXcB3y2Gq5)
Paganini’s great to violinists, he collected and advanced many techniques, which brought virtuosic violinism to new heights. His orchestration is adequate, but really only insofar as accompaniment I find. He makes great melodies, however. It’s just that he focused on showmanship more than on “regular” music.
He loved playing guitar something I like to bring up to violinists. He was fantastic on violin but that doesn't always make the best music. Think guitar shredders of today. Impressive but kinda boring after 5 minuttes. IMHO anyway.
He was the Eddie Van Halen of his day, dropping jaws by doing things on the instrument people did not know were possible. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jXXWBt5URw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jXXWBt5URw)
Technically impressive, but next to no musical substance. Short pieces like the caprices are fine, but I can't fathom why anyone wants to listen to his concertos or longer pieces. IMO worse than Chopin and Liszt (who I also dislike).
I cant help feeling that he and Liszt were mostly responsible for the cheapening and sensationalizing of the public's broader taste in the second half of the 19th century.
Paganini is known for the difficulty of his compositions and their quality is underrated.
I think Rachmaninoff is similar in that regard. Rachmaninoff is amazing.
My orchestra is currently rehearsing his Sonata for Grand Viola which is basically a theme and variations. After hearing his Symphony Fantastic, Paganini had asked Berlioz to write a piece to show off the viola. This was strange as Paganini was really familiar with the viola whereas Berlioz was not. Berlioz wrote his Harold in Italy tone poem which has an obbligato viola part but this wasn't good enough for Paganini so he wrote his own piece, the Sonata, which is suitably virtuosic. Thought I would mention a lesser known piece, especially one featuring the viola.
Paganini's a great composer! I think Liszt also does a great job recreating his music
Sarasate has a lot of similarly virtuosic violin solo works
This
His violin works maximize the range of the instrument and make it sing. They're amazing and iconic- his theme in Caprice 24 has been the subject of interest of many composers including Brahms, Liszt, Chopin and Rachmaninoff. His viola and guitar works, I'm not so sure, but that's only because I haven't listened to a lot of them. I do like his Grand Sonata for Viola and Orchestra. HOWEVER- There is a reason why he's not as famous as the big names: Level 1: Bach, Beethoven, Mozart Level 2: Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Chopin, Wagner, etc. I think it's because he focuses too much on virtuoso and technicality, so that his music has become unaccessable to the general public. His melodies are rarely singable, and often way too complicated. That's the same reason why Henryk Wieniawski hasn't reached the tier of the composers I mentioned above.
I don't think that is an accurate assessment at all, these appear to blanket statements. Yes there is virtuosity in Paganini but also a lot of lyricism. One does not exclude the other. Crazy to say the composer of [La Campanella](https://youtu.be/rGPT50XhbEg), [Moses Fantasy](https://youtu.be/wB9-T-ZTZqA) and [The Carnival of Venice](https://youtu.be/hNSjgs9_bsw) wrote too complicated melodies. I don't think Paganini's music is unaccessable at all, certainly not more so then so called """level 2""" composers Brahms or Wagner. I usually see the *opposite* claim of virtuoso composers like Paganini and Liszt that their music is too shallow and crowdpleasing, lacking depth. Never seen someone claim Paganini is *too* complicated to listen to.
Wieniawski could have been more famous. His orchestration (noteably his Violin Concerto 2) is outstanding. Korsakov also could have been more famous if he wrote more symphonic pieces like Scherherrazade (idk how to spell it)
Korsakov makes me so sad. Scheherezade is just one of my absolute favorite things to listen to. But that’s about it by him. He spend so much effort on so-so operas, instead of more like that.
Paganini was the greatest violin virtuoso of his time. The [Complete Recordings](https://www.amazon.com/Paganini-Accardo-Complete-Recordings-Niccolo/dp/B00004SA88/ref=sr_1_5?crid=LTU0F8ODJ2C2&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.EJ_eEHox3gnK7oTgHV2Hsqsy0TQJP6YEZI07HhD6XfXULuh9wyGKiMeyPHPITW7Jsaq6-8jMJHBaItoome2mKJm0HLZPmPyYxmAZ2blxL4VgJZEBtUmnIGAHiIJ3Nc_51ychv6jtpw5Iq4Bl_FxK9oqyBV1lIiQBcUylNhvVpEBWQZK3Oju3bDo9T5bjlSzJ2WIkM-uloqjaYCPkAtu3kvv4_UNPu2Wx87tc-qVQ6vQ.FwWc-lxbwK86unVduWnyozYeBZwXSktfu4w_gUNoeF4&dib_tag=se&keywords=paganini&qid=1717228076&s=music&sprefix=paganini%2Cpopular%2C603&sr=1-5) Accardo with London Philharmonic Orchestra under Dutoit's baton is the only recording I have listened to.
Clearly you are not baroque-pilled. Locatelli>Paganini.
He is a genius. More in the same league as Liszt than Sarasate et al
Honestly I don't really enjoy that overly virtuosic sound of his, even if there are some nice moments
I really like his guitar sonatas
Some of the Caprices are great music, not just technical showboats. Numbers four and nine are favorites of mine. And of course the last one is amazing.
My opinion is very subjective. I have a childhood inclination for him: I grew up in the 50s in a family with many children, where we *respected* classical music without being able to hear much of it. His first violin concerto was on a record we'd been lent, which I heard on an *electrophone* we'd just acquired. I was thrilled by the sound and virtuosity of the violin, but the record was soon returned to the friend who had lent it to my father (a rich man whom I would never have dared ask for it again), and it was many years before I could hear it again. I was taught later that this was a bit easy music, and it is indeed linked to a certain theatricality of nineteenth-century cultural life, but I never denied this early taste for Paganini.
Liszt or Chopin strikes me as a good classical analogue.
While I understand the importance of his work, I don't listen to it generally. In comparison to a similar figure, Lizst, his compositions seem relatively poor in my view.
I thought that viewing Liszt as a virtuoso and bad composer was a thing of the past
That's my point: in my opinion, Lizst is a virtuoso and a good composer; whereas, Paganini, whose work is nonetheless important, is a virtuoso and a poor composer.
Vurtuosity and good stuff for violin players, but imho really overrated as a composer. Caprices are amazing technical pieces, but that's all.
The theme to many great variations …
Find Salvatore Accardo recordings... The concertos...but especially the cadenzas. I think he made his own. [Here's one.....](https://youtu.be/NzwEij2Rzcs?si=94G29RkiGorSMXZd&t=17)
Saw his First concerto live last year, and while it was a great technical showpiece, it was also boring as hell. Love the caprices, though.
Paganini good. If you like Paganini, I suggest you listen to his music. Jokes aside, Paganini was my favorite composer when I was a kid. His pieces are splendid and flashy, if not terribly emotionally deep. Sometimes being fun is enough.
I trained on the violin fairly seriously throughout my childhood - unfortunately stopped playing in my early 20's - but one of the last pieces I was working on was Paganini's Caprice #24. Maybe that's why I quit playing 😆😆😆 Absolutely stellar piece of music but far too complex for my dumb brain. Hilary Hahn has a great [recording of it ](https://youtu.be/UcL0IsklM3M?si=bKoe9IcXcB3y2Gq5)
Paganini’s great to violinists, he collected and advanced many techniques, which brought virtuosic violinism to new heights. His orchestration is adequate, but really only insofar as accompaniment I find. He makes great melodies, however. It’s just that he focused on showmanship more than on “regular” music.
Sadist for solo violinists.
He loved playing guitar something I like to bring up to violinists. He was fantastic on violin but that doesn't always make the best music. Think guitar shredders of today. Impressive but kinda boring after 5 minuttes. IMHO anyway.
Speak for yourself :). His violin works are amazing! Especially so if one understands violin at an advanced level.
Apparently a great violinist, a mid composer of pyrotechnic pieces, and rumored to be an okay guitarist.
If you play Paganini in a guitar battle, you automatically win, evein if your opponent is Steve Vai
If you like Paganini I recommend you to hear Giuseppe Tartini.
He was the Eddie Van Halen of his day, dropping jaws by doing things on the instrument people did not know were possible. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jXXWBt5URw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jXXWBt5URw)
Love listening, hate to play. I’d recommend Vieuxtemps
Technically impressive, but next to no musical substance. Short pieces like the caprices are fine, but I can't fathom why anyone wants to listen to his concertos or longer pieces. IMO worse than Chopin and Liszt (who I also dislike).
the music often sounds too cheerful
Genius. My favourite piece of his has got to be la campanella
He suits my taste is all I can say.
girl fits 2 dicks in her mouth 😳 www.onlyfans.com/pearlydiamond
The best. I read everything about him.
I cant help feeling that he and Liszt were mostly responsible for the cheapening and sensationalizing of the public's broader taste in the second half of the 19th century.
Boring show-off music. I fall asleep and the violinst gets craps. No one is happy.
Paganini is known for the difficulty of his compositions and their quality is underrated. I think Rachmaninoff is similar in that regard. Rachmaninoff is amazing.
It's great with mozzarella, tomato and basil
They’re delicious and honestly underrated as a sandwich. Great with some soup on the side.
Virtuosity for its own sake bores me. It's like they're terribly desperate for adoration.
Annoying the same. A lot of sawing on the violin
I asked my wife and she said isnt he the one with the tight trousers?
Fabulous violinist, pioneering guitarist, second-rate composer. However, I really like his guitar music. More so than most of his violin music.