Talk:Violin Concerto No. 1 (Wieniawski)

Untitled
I wikified this article but I suspect it may be a copyright violation. I don't have the recording referenced so I can't check. RosinDebow 05:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Peacock - Original research statements
The following text was included in the article, it appears to be original research and quite possibly personal opinion and has been removed here until such time as it can be supported by citations.

Graham1973 (talk) 09:33, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

The striking feature about this movement is the fact that the solo part can be, and probably is intended to be, played on the G-string, thereby exhibiting the richness of the violin's tone.

The overall piece is rarely performed in concerts due to its weakness in the second and third movements. Many consider this piece as an improperly balanced piece, with a tense, challenging first movement and a transparent, weak second and third movement.

However, a judicious execution of these latter movements can redress the balance. For instance, the second movement, being played on the G-string will provide a substantial challenge, especially with extreme sensitivity balancing the "religioso" and lyrical characteristics of this movement. It is also thought that Wieniawski intended a calm respite after the acrobatic first movement.

A keen eye and ear for detail can also add polish to a performance of the later movements. For instance, in the second movement, there is the occurrence of the German Sixth chord where the augmented sixth comes only in the solo part and at the very end of that bar. In other words the solo violin changes the inflexion of that harmony at the last moment. In the final movement, the lyrical second subject can be played avoiding the brilliant tone of the E-string by engaging in higher positions notably on the A and D strings, thus bringing a silkier quality to the violin's singing tone, while at the same time stretching the soloist's interpretive and technical skills, as vibrato can be broader and warmer in these high positions. The brilliance of the first movement can be recaptured in the final section of the last movement, which is intended to be performed as fast and crisply as the soloist can manage. It is sometimes argued that Wieniawksi "front-loaded" this composition too much, whereupon he ran out of steam when it came to the latter two movements. Essentially, being his first attempt at writing a concerto, Wieniawski probably conceived the project as a showpiece of technical virtuosity, on a par with, or indeed to outdo, any of Paganini's Caprices or concertos, and along the lines of violin fantasies on operatic themes that were becoming more and more fashionable. However, all technical virtuosity is in effect invested in the first movement, thereby leaving the other two somewhat bereft of equivalent brilliance. When asked about the sheer near-impossible demands of the first movement, Wieniawski was reputed to have said, "Il faut risquer!" (One must take risks!). Wieniaski's Second Violin Concerto is perhaps proof that such risks may not be so worthwhile and due more to the exuberance of a debutant concerto-composer. The Second Violin Concerto (Op 22) proved, most probably from accumulated experience, to be a more balanced work throughout the three movements, and, while being less technically demanding, marked a considerable advance in Wienawski's skills as a composer in general.


 * I agree. I looked for some other sources on-line for this using Google and did not have any luck.  Nonetheless, the number of hits that come up of major recordings suggest it is a significant piece, so I would definitely not suggest AfD.  Hopefully, a classical music lover can bring in some more WP:RS.  Came here from WP:backlog  --David Tornheim (talk) 08:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)