Barber or Bruch?
Technically and musically speaking, do you all find Bruch (G minor) or Barber generally to be more difficult, and why? It varies by person, but I'm trying to figure out a basic agreement on the question.
Played Bruch about 15 years ago, starting Barber now. I place Bruch on the level below Barber. I feel like Bruch "helps" you play as a violinist a lot more in the pacing and the left/right hand technique. I feel like you can put it together a page or two at a time and there are no passages that take a dump on your self confidence.
Both concertos have in common a 3rd movement that is very much more difficult than the first two movements.
It’s interesting back 20 years ago, Barber wasn’t really a piece that people would play that much of in music schools compared to some of the other big concertos. Now it’s one of the pieces you are almost required to learn if you go to a top US music school. I don’t know if it’s the same in Europe. I find Bruch’s 1st and 2nd concertos along with the Scottish Fantasy to be much more important to learn in addition to the core Germanic repertoire (especially Bach) in your formative years over the Barber. I might be old fashioned but I just have never thought of Barber as part of the core repertoire like Wieniawski, Paganini, Vieuxtemps, Beethoven, Bach, Tchaikovsky, Lalo, Sibelius, Prokofiev, Brahms, Mozart, or Spohr.
I found Bruch harder, but my technique was in a questionable place when I was playing it.
I think Bruch is harder overall. However, as Mary Ellen noted, both have a much more difficult third movement than the other movements.
I agree Lydia. The last movement of Bruch's 2nd is also tremendously tough. It can compare in my opinion with some of Paganini and Sarasate's pieces in difficulty.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.