Talk:Piano Concerto No. 2 (Brahms)

message: I've removed the following:
:The first movement in particular has a very martial, triumphant character, and reminds one a bit of the music to the Star Wars movies.
It's the Star Wars comparison that bothers me. It's really just an opinion. I'm sure we all have ideas what the movement sounds like (I know I do), but we can't really put them all in the article. If we could say "Eduard Hanslick considered the first movement to be reminiscent of John Williams' score for Star Wars" then that would be different, but I don't think he held that opinion, and until we find a quotable commentator who does, I think it's best out of the article. --Camembert
You are correct sir.
:Thanks for removal of that line...sounds like POV as I have listened to this piece every day during my work and I have never thought of it as Star wars.--Seadog ♪ 00:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Star Wars comment

message: While reading I noticed it said it was first performed in Budapest. Does any body have any references for that? Just asking because I have never read that. — Seadog (Talk) 16:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Premiere

message: I reverted an edit where the contributor removed the mention of the specialness of the four-movement form with the following reason:  most of the concertos are built in the classical form, which is four movements- classical style. It is wrong to say that most concertos are in three movements.  I don't agree.  While the typcial four-movement form applied to symphonies, sonatas and chamber music it had not yet been applied to concertos.  The concertos of Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Weber, Mendelssohn & Schumann all had three movements.  The earlier concertos of Bach and his children (JC and CPE) also had three movements (with Brandenburg #1 being the only exception I can think of -- and with the minuet being placed fourth instead of in the middle like in classical four-movement form.  I think its worth mentioning the extra movement that Brahms wrote into the work.  DavidRF 14:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Four movements 

message: I reverted an edit which added discussion for each of the movements.  It was copied verbatim from here: [].  DavidRF 03:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job catching that. Arjun 18:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation 

message: for every notable interpretation, there needs to be a reference explaining why it is notable.  Please!--99.233.126.97 (talk) 15:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable interpretations 

message: I have heavily revised this article.
PLEASE format the citations, because I don't know how to do so.
The description of the movements is now just that; it is not a heavily detailed analysis anymore.
Mathpianist93 (talk) 03:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi there.. Thanks for your substantial cleanup of this article. It is quite a lot more legible. Regarding http://w3.rz-berlin.mpg.de and http://www.ivanmoravec.net links cited, these are tertiary sources, secondary at best. I haven't touched these references, because I hope that there are better ones out there somewhere...? --Blehfu (talk) 04:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major changes 

message: Anyone beside me notice a similarity between the finale of Mozart's Piano Concerto No. 27 and this concerto's finale? Raaronson (talk) 12:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mozart Influence? 

message: In the Description section:The main theme is introduced by the horn solo, with the piano interceding. 
I'd make the change, but I don't know what the editor meant. To intercede is to intervene on behalf of another. Presumably not what the piano is doing here. 
MarkinBoston (talk) 16:45, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not sure what is meant