WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.859 Imagine for a second that you've written a novel 00:00:02.859 --> 00:00:06.120 and not just any novel. You are absolutely convinced 00:00:06.120 --> 00:00:08.279 this is your masterpiece. Right. It's a book 00:00:08.279 --> 00:00:10.660 that's going to define your entire legacy. So 00:00:10.660 --> 00:00:13.099 you pour your absolute best work into it. You 00:00:13.099 --> 00:00:15.140 seal it in a novel. You send it to the publisher. 00:00:15.339 --> 00:00:18.539 And then just silence. Exactly. Yeah. Total silence. 00:00:18.600 --> 00:00:20.940 You actually pass away before anyone really reads 00:00:20.940 --> 00:00:23.600 it. And for 10 years, that manuscript just sits 00:00:23.600 --> 00:00:26.100 in a pile of dusty papers, completely ignored. 00:00:26.460 --> 00:00:29.579 Yeah, it is the ultimate nightmare scenario for 00:00:29.579 --> 00:00:32.820 any creator. I mean, the work exists, but without 00:00:32.820 --> 00:00:34.979 an audience, does it really live? Right, it's 00:00:34.979 --> 00:00:36.880 a philosophical question at that point. Yeah. 00:00:37.079 --> 00:00:39.640 But today, we aren't talking about a book. We're 00:00:39.640 --> 00:00:42.659 doing a deep dive into what is arguably one of 00:00:42.659 --> 00:00:44.439 the most important pieces of orchestral music 00:00:44.439 --> 00:00:47.299 ever written. We are talking about Franz Schubert's 00:00:47.299 --> 00:00:50.039 Symphony No. 9, which is famously known as The 00:00:50.039 --> 00:00:53.049 Great. And, you know, the great moniker isn't 00:00:53.049 --> 00:00:54.890 just clever marketing, though we will definitely 00:00:54.890 --> 00:00:57.450 get to that. This is the piece that really bridged 00:00:57.450 --> 00:01:00.509 the gap between the classical precision of someone 00:01:00.509 --> 00:01:04.030 like Beethoven and the massive, sweeping, emotional 00:01:04.030 --> 00:01:07.510 soundscapes of the romantics. Yeah. But our mission 00:01:07.510 --> 00:01:09.989 today isn't just to analyze the music theory. 00:01:10.510 --> 00:01:13.650 It's to unravel this whole detective story of 00:01:13.650 --> 00:01:16.909 how this masterpiece was lost, rejected, and 00:01:16.909 --> 00:01:19.569 then nearly forgotten forever. And we have combed 00:01:19.569 --> 00:01:22.629 through the historical archives, letters from 00:01:22.629 --> 00:01:25.230 the composers themselves, and extensive musical 00:01:25.230 --> 00:01:28.390 analysis to piece this timeline together for 00:01:28.390 --> 00:01:31.230 you. And honestly, looking at the sources... 00:01:31.739 --> 00:01:34.519 It reads like a timeline of near misses. It really 00:01:34.519 --> 00:01:37.099 does. It's basically a miracle we have this music 00:01:37.099 --> 00:01:39.200 at all today. It is. And I think we need to set 00:01:39.200 --> 00:01:41.579 the context right away. When we say symphony 00:01:41.579 --> 00:01:43.659 in the early 19th century, most people immediately 00:01:43.659 --> 00:01:46.480 think of Beethoven. Oh, sure. Right. By the time 00:01:46.480 --> 00:01:49.120 Schubert writes this, Beethoven is this absolute 00:01:49.120 --> 00:01:52.060 titan casting a huge shadow over everyone in 00:01:52.060 --> 00:01:55.420 Vienna. And Schubert is, well, he's the shy songwriter 00:01:55.420 --> 00:01:57.719 living in that shadow. This symphony was his 00:01:57.719 --> 00:01:59.980 attempt to finally step into the light. Which 00:01:59.980 --> 00:02:02.060 makes the tragedy you hinted at even worse because 00:02:02.060 --> 00:02:03.959 he never heard a professional note of it played. 00:02:04.120 --> 00:02:06.480 Not a single one. That fact just blows my mind 00:02:06.480 --> 00:02:09.039 every time I think about it. But before we get 00:02:09.039 --> 00:02:11.860 to the tragedy, let's unpack the identity crisis 00:02:11.860 --> 00:02:14.259 this core symphony has suffered. Because if you 00:02:14.259 --> 00:02:17.139 look this piece up, you see the great. And it 00:02:17.139 --> 00:02:19.199 sounds like Schubert had a massive ego. Like, 00:02:19.219 --> 00:02:21.759 here's my great symphony. You're welcome. Was 00:02:21.759 --> 00:02:23.599 he just feeling really confident that day? You 00:02:23.599 --> 00:02:25.719 would completely think so. Right. It sounds like 00:02:25.719 --> 00:02:28.500 a total flex, but the reality is actually much 00:02:28.500 --> 00:02:30.699 more mundane, which I think makes it kind of 00:02:30.699 --> 00:02:32.580 funny. It wasn't an artistic statement at all. 00:02:32.639 --> 00:02:35.139 It was literally a filing system. A filing system. 00:02:35.340 --> 00:02:37.860 Yeah. Schubert had written a symphony in C major 00:02:37.860 --> 00:02:41.039 previously, his symphony number six. And that 00:02:41.039 --> 00:02:43.139 one is charming. It's lighter, a bit shorter. 00:02:43.400 --> 00:02:46.439 So when he wrote this new massive work, which 00:02:46.439 --> 00:02:49.740 was also in C major catalog number D944 for anyone. 00:02:50.360 --> 00:02:52.840 keeping track, the publishers needed a way to 00:02:52.840 --> 00:02:55.379 tell them apart on the physical shelf. Oh, I 00:02:55.379 --> 00:02:57.539 see. So you had the little C major and the great 00:02:57.539 --> 00:03:00.419 C major. So it is literally like ordering a coffee. 00:03:00.639 --> 00:03:02.840 I'll take the Venice C major, please. Essentially, 00:03:03.300 --> 00:03:06.379 yes. But as time went on, the meaning of the 00:03:06.379 --> 00:03:09.199 nickname naturally shifted. It stopped being 00:03:09.199 --> 00:03:11.259 just about the physical size of the score or 00:03:11.259 --> 00:03:13.340 the duration, and it started being about the 00:03:13.340 --> 00:03:15.479 ambition of the music itself. Because it is ambitious. 00:03:16.900 --> 00:03:19.580 Extremely. The little symphony is lovely, but 00:03:19.580 --> 00:03:23.099 the great is, well, it's earth shattering. It's 00:03:23.099 --> 00:03:25.020 a completely different beast. It demands your 00:03:25.020 --> 00:03:27.419 attention in a way his earlier symphonies just 00:03:27.419 --> 00:03:30.840 didn't. Now, speaking of confusion, the name 00:03:30.840 --> 00:03:33.300 isn't the only problem here. The number seems 00:03:33.300 --> 00:03:36.240 to be a total mess. Oh, it's a nightmare. I've 00:03:36.240 --> 00:03:38.960 seen it listed as symphony number nine, which 00:03:38.960 --> 00:03:40.860 is the standard I think most of us know today. 00:03:41.259 --> 00:03:43.400 But I've also seen number eight, and apparently 00:03:43.400 --> 00:03:46.110 some people used to call it number seven. Why 00:03:46.110 --> 00:03:48.050 can't historians just agree on a simple number? 00:03:48.250 --> 00:03:50.849 This is one of those classic musicological headaches 00:03:50.849 --> 00:03:53.490 that absolutely drives college students crazy. 00:03:53.810 --> 00:03:56.229 It all comes down to how you count incomplete 00:03:56.229 --> 00:03:59.330 work. Because Schubert was notorious for starting 00:03:59.330 --> 00:04:02.150 things and just not finishing them. The unfinished 00:04:02.150 --> 00:04:04.090 symphony being the most famous example of that. 00:04:04.169 --> 00:04:06.310 Right, the one that just stops abruptly after 00:04:06.310 --> 00:04:09.610 two movements. Exactly. So, here's the breakdown. 00:04:10.229 --> 00:04:12.849 If you are looking at the new Schubert edition 00:04:12.849 --> 00:04:16.189 or reading most German musicologists, they often 00:04:16.189 --> 00:04:19.029 list the great as number eight. Their logic is 00:04:19.029 --> 00:04:21.170 that you only count the completed symphonies 00:04:21.170 --> 00:04:24.509 plus the unfinished. Okay, that makes some sense 00:04:24.509 --> 00:04:26.910 logically. Right. But in the English -speaking 00:04:26.910 --> 00:04:29.269 world, and largely in the standard repertoire 00:04:29.269 --> 00:04:31.209 recordings you'll find on streaming services 00:04:31.209 --> 00:04:35.029 today, we count a different draft, symphony number 00:04:35.029 --> 00:04:38.129 seven, which exists just in a sketch. We keep 00:04:38.129 --> 00:04:40.290 that in the lineup. And that pushes the great 00:04:40.290 --> 00:04:42.470 to number nine. And what about the people calling 00:04:42.470 --> 00:04:44.290 it number seven? Are they just trying to mess 00:04:44.290 --> 00:04:46.689 with us? That was an older convention from the 00:04:46.689 --> 00:04:49.310 19th century before the catalog was fully standardized. 00:04:49.709 --> 00:04:51.649 They were basically skipping all the unfinished 00:04:51.649 --> 00:04:54.050 stuff entirely. But here is the real takeaway 00:04:54.050 --> 00:04:55.850 for you listening, so you don't get bogged down 00:04:55.850 --> 00:04:58.009 in the math. Whether you see it listed as eight 00:04:58.009 --> 00:05:00.529 or nine, we are talking about the final completed 00:05:00.529 --> 00:05:03.930 symphony of his career. It is his last full statement 00:05:03.930 --> 00:05:06.970 to the world. Now, that phrase, last full statement, 00:05:07.089 --> 00:05:10.209 usually implies a kind of deathbed work. There's 00:05:10.209 --> 00:05:13.209 this super romantic myth that Schubert wrote 00:05:13.209 --> 00:05:16.350 this in 1828, right before he died at age 31, 00:05:16.649 --> 00:05:19.649 pouring his final life force onto the page. People 00:05:19.649 --> 00:05:21.550 really love that narrative, the dying artist 00:05:21.550 --> 00:05:23.730 raging against the dying of the light. It's very 00:05:23.730 --> 00:05:25.910 dramatic. But the source material tells a completely 00:05:25.910 --> 00:05:28.860 different story. Modern analysis of the paper 00:05:28.860 --> 00:05:31.199 types and the handwriting in the sketches actually 00:05:31.199 --> 00:05:33.879 dates the composition to the summer of 1825. 00:05:34.160 --> 00:05:36.439 So he was perfectly healthy. He was doing relatively 00:05:36.439 --> 00:05:38.540 well. He was in Gastein, which is this beautiful 00:05:38.540 --> 00:05:41.220 spa town in the Austrian Alps. He was surrounded 00:05:41.220 --> 00:05:43.980 by nature, he was feeling good, and he was incredibly 00:05:43.980 --> 00:05:46.180 ambitious. That's a very different picture. Totally. 00:05:46.259 --> 00:05:49.259 We actually have a letter from March 1824 where 00:05:49.259 --> 00:05:51.860 he explicitly says he is paving his way toward 00:05:51.860 --> 00:05:55.139 a grand symphony. This wasn't a panic -induced 00:05:55.139 --> 00:05:57.860 rush job at the end of his life. this was a calculated 00:05:57.860 --> 00:06:00.579 multi -year project to prove he could write a 00:06:00.579 --> 00:06:03.139 symphony on the sheer scale of Beethoven. That 00:06:03.139 --> 00:06:05.100 changes the whole vibe of the piece entirely 00:06:05.100 --> 00:06:08.060 for me. It's not a funeral dirge or a desperate 00:06:08.060 --> 00:06:11.420 farewell. It's a statement of intent. It's a 00:06:11.420 --> 00:06:14.480 young man saying, I have arrived. Precisely. 00:06:14.480 --> 00:06:17.079 He was swinging for the fences. So he finishes 00:06:17.079 --> 00:06:20.420 it in 1826. He's proud of it. He sends it to 00:06:20.420 --> 00:06:23.680 the big leagues, the Gesellschaft der Musikfond 00:06:23.680 --> 00:06:27.589 in Vienna. The Society of Friends of Music. This 00:06:27.589 --> 00:06:29.810 is his big shot. And this is where the heartbreak 00:06:29.810 --> 00:06:32.370 really begins. He dedicates it to them. He sends 00:06:32.370 --> 00:06:35.629 them this massive, dense score. They pay him 00:06:35.629 --> 00:06:38.209 a small fee, which he desperately needed because 00:06:38.209 --> 00:06:40.509 he was pretty much always broke. Right. They 00:06:40.509 --> 00:06:42.649 copy out the individual parts for the musicians. 00:06:43.550 --> 00:06:45.529 And then they try to play it. I feel like try 00:06:45.529 --> 00:06:48.089 in the operative word there. Very much so. The 00:06:48.089 --> 00:06:50.170 historical records say they gave it a perfunctory 00:06:50.170 --> 00:06:53.189 run -through in the latter half of 1827. Ouch. 00:06:54.069 --> 00:06:56.149 Perfunctory is such a stinging word when you're 00:06:56.149 --> 00:06:58.149 talking about someone's art. It means they just 00:06:58.149 --> 00:06:59.889 went through the motions, checked the box, and 00:06:59.889 --> 00:07:02.459 moved on. They essentially sight -read it, decided 00:07:02.459 --> 00:07:05.040 it was way too long, too difficult, and frankly, 00:07:05.160 --> 00:07:07.339 just too weird for them. You have to understand, 00:07:07.420 --> 00:07:09.220 the orchestra at the conservatory was largely 00:07:09.220 --> 00:07:11.759 made up of amateurs. They simply couldn't handle 00:07:11.759 --> 00:07:14.480 the technical demands of what he wrote. So they 00:07:14.480 --> 00:07:16.720 shelved it. Wait, they didn't even reject it 00:07:16.720 --> 00:07:18.139 outright and give it back to him so he could 00:07:18.139 --> 00:07:19.600 send it to another city? They just put it in 00:07:19.600 --> 00:07:22.160 a drawer? Effectively, yes. They filed it away 00:07:22.160 --> 00:07:24.720 in the archives. And Schubert died a year later 00:07:24.720 --> 00:07:29.209 in November 1828. There's a tiny slender thread 00:07:29.209 --> 00:07:31.329 of evidence suggesting a performance might have 00:07:31.329 --> 00:07:34.629 happened in 1829. But most scholars now think 00:07:34.629 --> 00:07:37.050 that was actually just the little C major again. 00:07:37.269 --> 00:07:40.629 Wow. So it is overwhelmingly likely that the 00:07:40.629 --> 00:07:42.970 great just sat in the archives of the society 00:07:42.970 --> 00:07:45.529 gathering dust totally unheard by the public. 00:07:45.730 --> 00:07:48.850 It sits there for 10 whole years. A full decade. 00:07:48.930 --> 00:07:52.089 The ink is drying. The paper is yellowing. And 00:07:52.089 --> 00:07:54.209 then we get the crossover episode of the century. 00:07:54.629 --> 00:07:57.779 Enter the hero of our story. Robert Schumann 00:07:57.779 --> 00:07:59.959 This is truly one of the great moments in music 00:07:59.959 --> 00:08:03.379 history. It's 1838. Schubert has been dead for 00:08:03.379 --> 00:08:06.240 10 years. Schumann is visiting Vienna, and he's 00:08:06.240 --> 00:08:08.740 already a huge fan of Schubert's songs and his 00:08:08.740 --> 00:08:11.779 piano music. He decides to pay a visit to Schubert's 00:08:11.779 --> 00:08:14.779 brother, Ferdinand. Ferdinand Schubert. He must 00:08:14.779 --> 00:08:16.759 have been sitting on an absolute treasure trove 00:08:16.759 --> 00:08:19.759 of music. He was, and Ferdinand, knowing Schumann 00:08:19.759 --> 00:08:22.160 is this highly influential critic and a great 00:08:22.160 --> 00:08:24.759 composer himself, brings him into the study and 00:08:24.759 --> 00:08:27.519 shows him the pile of manuscripts. Schumann starts 00:08:27.519 --> 00:08:29.759 digging through them, literally looking through 00:08:29.759 --> 00:08:35.679 stacks. I can only imagine that feeling. It's 00:08:35.679 --> 00:08:37.919 like finding a lost Beatles album in a basement 00:08:37.919 --> 00:08:40.730 or unearthing a new Shakespeare play. Schumann 00:08:40.730 --> 00:08:42.809 went absolutely crazy for it. We have the letters 00:08:42.809 --> 00:08:44.830 he wrote to his fiancée, Clara, saying he was 00:08:44.830 --> 00:08:47.769 happy and blissful just to have seen it. He wrote 00:08:47.769 --> 00:08:50.330 a massive article about it in his magazine, the 00:08:50.330 --> 00:08:53.250 Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, and he coined a phrase 00:08:53.250 --> 00:08:55.870 that has stuck to the symphony ever since. He 00:08:55.870 --> 00:08:58.690 praised its heavenly length. Heavenly length. 00:08:58.809 --> 00:09:00.429 I want to pause on that for a second, because 00:09:00.429 --> 00:09:03.169 today, if you tell someone a movie has heavenly 00:09:03.169 --> 00:09:06.169 length, they might roll their eyes. We have very 00:09:06.169 --> 00:09:09.659 short attention spans now. Was he apologizing 00:09:09.659 --> 00:09:12.179 for how long it was? Not at all. He meant it 00:09:12.179 --> 00:09:14.879 as the absolute highest compliment. He compared 00:09:14.879 --> 00:09:17.279 it to a thick four volume novel by the writer 00:09:17.279 --> 00:09:19.840 Jean -Paul. The idea was that the world short 00:09:19.840 --> 00:09:23.220 created was so rich, so deeply immersive that 00:09:23.220 --> 00:09:26.440 you, the listener, never wanted it to end. He 00:09:26.440 --> 00:09:28.580 felt that Schubert was completely in control 00:09:28.580 --> 00:09:30.940 of this massive narrative. It wasn't rambling. 00:09:31.059 --> 00:09:33.799 It was epic. So it's not dragging. It's the difference 00:09:33.799 --> 00:09:36.379 between a long commute and a long vacation. That's 00:09:36.379 --> 00:09:38.220 a fantastic way to put it. But Schumann didn't 00:09:38.220 --> 00:09:40.220 just write a glowing review and leave it at that. 00:09:40.279 --> 00:09:43.080 He took action. He secured a copy of the score 00:09:43.080 --> 00:09:45.899 and sent it back to Leipzig. And who was running 00:09:45.899 --> 00:09:48.559 the orchestra in Leipzig at the time? Felix Mendelssohn. 00:09:48.659 --> 00:09:50.659 The one and only. So you have Schubert writing 00:09:50.659 --> 00:09:52.559 it, Schumann discovering it, and Mendelssohn 00:09:52.559 --> 00:09:55.000 conducting the premiere. It's basically the holy 00:09:55.000 --> 00:09:57.740 trinity of early romantic music working together 00:09:57.740 --> 00:10:00.460 across time. And the premiere finally happens 00:10:00.460 --> 00:10:04.940 in March 1839. Was it a success? Yeah. In Leipzig. 00:10:05.309 --> 00:10:08.370 Huge success. Schumann and Mendelssohn championed 00:10:08.370 --> 00:10:11.049 it, and the Leipzig audience was very sophisticated. 00:10:11.769 --> 00:10:15.429 But, and here's the catch, just because the musical 00:10:15.429 --> 00:10:17.649 geniuses loved it didn't mean the average orchestral 00:10:17.649 --> 00:10:20.330 musicians did. Ah, right, we're back to the too 00:10:20.330 --> 00:10:22.529 -difficult problem that doomed it in Vienna ten 00:10:22.529 --> 00:10:24.610 years earlier. We are. You have to remember... 00:10:24.789 --> 00:10:27.649 Orchestra players in the 1830s and 40s were used 00:10:27.649 --> 00:10:30.750 to playing Haydn and Mozart. Even Beethoven was 00:10:30.750 --> 00:10:32.509 still considered a stretch for a lot of them. 00:10:33.269 --> 00:10:35.149 Schubert's writing in this symphony requires 00:10:35.149 --> 00:10:38.549 incredible physical stamina. The string players 00:10:38.549 --> 00:10:40.649 have to play these fast, repetitive, driving 00:10:40.649 --> 00:10:43.389 figures for page after page without a single 00:10:43.389 --> 00:10:45.799 break. There's a specific story about this that 00:10:45.799 --> 00:10:47.759 I found hilarious in the sources, though probably 00:10:47.759 --> 00:10:49.679 wasn't very funny for the conductor at the time. 00:10:49.779 --> 00:10:53.120 It happened in London, right? Yes, 1844. Mendelssohn, 00:10:53.179 --> 00:10:55.299 who absolutely loved this piece and wanted to 00:10:55.299 --> 00:10:57.279 spread the gospel of Schubert everywhere he went, 00:10:57.419 --> 00:10:59.659 tries to bring it to London. He's rehearsing 00:10:59.659 --> 00:11:01.500 with the Philharmonic. They get to the finale. 00:11:02.019 --> 00:11:05.360 And violinists, they literally start laughing. 00:11:05.379 --> 00:11:09.070 They laughed at the music. Out loud. They collapsed 00:11:09.070 --> 00:11:12.289 in giggles. They found the main triplet figure 00:11:12.289 --> 00:11:15.490 in the finale, this fast, relentless da -da -da 00:11:15.490 --> 00:11:18.429 -da -da -da to be completely absurd. They thought 00:11:18.429 --> 00:11:20.529 it was unplayable and ridiculous. It sounded 00:11:20.529 --> 00:11:23.029 like a technical exercise to them, not a real 00:11:23.029 --> 00:11:26.429 melody. That is so disrespectful. Imagine Mendelssohn, 00:11:26.490 --> 00:11:28.370 one of the greatest musicians who ever lived, 00:11:28.509 --> 00:11:31.429 standing on the podium, baton in hand, and the 00:11:31.429 --> 00:11:34.730 violin section is creating this undiscovered 00:11:34.730 --> 00:11:38.730 masterpiece like a joke. It got so bad that Mendelssohn 00:11:38.730 --> 00:11:41.370 actually withdrew the piece. He refused to conduct 00:11:41.370 --> 00:11:43.669 it with them. He basically threw down the gauntlet 00:11:43.669 --> 00:11:45.450 and said, if you can't take this seriously, we 00:11:45.450 --> 00:11:48.190 aren't doing it. Wow. Good for him. And it wasn't 00:11:48.190 --> 00:11:51.350 just London either. In Paris in 1842, the orchestra 00:11:51.350 --> 00:11:54.190 there flat out refused to play it. They rehearsed 00:11:54.190 --> 00:11:55.750 it once and said, no, this is too much. It's 00:11:55.750 --> 00:11:58.620 too hard. It literally took decades for standard 00:11:58.620 --> 00:12:00.740 orchestral technique to catch up with Schubert's 00:12:00.740 --> 00:12:02.659 vision. That's such a common theme with true 00:12:02.659 --> 00:12:04.740 visionaries. The hardware just hasn't caught 00:12:04.740 --> 00:12:06.840 up to the software yet. So let's get into the 00:12:06.840 --> 00:12:09.759 software of this piece. What exactly were these 00:12:09.759 --> 00:12:12.000 musicians struggling with? What makes the great 00:12:12.000 --> 00:12:14.820 so fundamentally different from what came before 00:12:14.820 --> 00:12:17.909 it? There are a few key innovations that really 00:12:17.909 --> 00:12:20.009 set this piece apart from anything else at the 00:12:20.009 --> 00:12:22.309 time. The first one, and this is something you 00:12:22.309 --> 00:12:24.870 can hear immediately when you listen to it, is 00:12:24.870 --> 00:12:28.350 how he uses the trombones. Trombones. Okay. In 00:12:28.350 --> 00:12:31.029 my head, trombones in classical music are usually 00:12:31.029 --> 00:12:33.169 just blasting in the background during the loud 00:12:33.169 --> 00:12:36.990 parts to add volume and drama. Exactly. Before 00:12:36.990 --> 00:12:39.490 this, in the classical era, trombones were used 00:12:39.490 --> 00:12:42.179 for two things. Religious solemnity like in a 00:12:42.179 --> 00:12:44.399 church service or a requiem mass or just pure 00:12:44.399 --> 00:12:47.080 volume reinforcement. Even Beethoven in his famous 00:12:47.080 --> 00:12:49.759 Ninth Symphony uses them mostly to double the 00:12:49.759 --> 00:12:52.000 voices in the choir. They are support staff. 00:12:52.200 --> 00:12:54.120 And Schubert promotes them to the main cast. 00:12:54.399 --> 00:12:57.700 He makes them lead actors. In the great, the 00:12:57.700 --> 00:12:59.519 trombones are actually playing the melodies. 00:12:59.700 --> 00:13:02.840 And crucially, they are playing softly. In the 00:13:02.840 --> 00:13:05.059 first movement, they play these gorgeous lyrical 00:13:05.059 --> 00:13:08.220 lines, pianissimo. That was revolutionary. It 00:13:08.220 --> 00:13:10.580 completely changed the color of the orchestral 00:13:10.580 --> 00:13:14.440 sound. It gave it this dark, golden, warm depth 00:13:14.440 --> 00:13:17.120 that became the signature romantic sound later 00:13:17.120 --> 00:13:19.399 on. So when we listen to this, we shouldn't just 00:13:19.399 --> 00:13:21.840 wait for the loud brass blast. We should actually 00:13:21.840 --> 00:13:24.320 listen for the trombone singing. Yes, listen 00:13:24.320 --> 00:13:26.519 for them interacting with the woodwinds like 00:13:26.519 --> 00:13:28.820 equals. It's a texture that simply didn't exist 00:13:28.820 --> 00:13:30.759 in symphonies before this. What's the second 00:13:30.759 --> 00:13:32.909 big shift? It's the f***. Focus on pure melody 00:13:32.909 --> 00:13:35.870 over conflict. Think of Beethoven's Fifth. Dun, 00:13:35.970 --> 00:13:38.049 dun, dun, de, a, a. That's a motif. It's a rhythmic 00:13:38.049 --> 00:13:40.529 hammer. Beethoven builds a cathedral out of bricks. 00:13:40.690 --> 00:13:43.809 He develops a tiny, angry idea into a massive 00:13:43.809 --> 00:13:46.769 structure through conflict and resolution. But 00:13:46.769 --> 00:13:49.309 Schubert is a songwriter at heart. He writes 00:13:49.309 --> 00:13:51.669 leader. So he builds a cathedral out of tunes. 00:13:51.870 --> 00:13:54.750 In a way, yes. He keeps the massive architectural 00:13:54.750 --> 00:13:57.889 structure of Beethoven, the sonata form, the 00:13:57.889 --> 00:14:00.110 long development sections. But he fills it with 00:14:00.110 --> 00:14:04.679 these long... continuous singing lines. It's 00:14:04.679 --> 00:14:06.820 exactly why Schumann called it heavenly length. 00:14:06.980 --> 00:14:09.039 You aren't just watching a structural argument 00:14:09.039 --> 00:14:11.340 unfold. You're being carried along by a song. 00:14:11.720 --> 00:14:13.840 Let's walk through that structure briefly because 00:14:13.840 --> 00:14:16.879 it is a marathon of a piece. It's four movements, 00:14:16.960 --> 00:14:19.899 the standard format, but just... supersized right 00:14:19.899 --> 00:14:22.419 movement one starts with an introduction but 00:14:22.419 --> 00:14:24.720 it's not just a quick here we go intro to grab 00:14:24.720 --> 00:14:27.600 your attention it's a solid section of music 00:14:27.600 --> 00:14:30.659 marked on dante that lays out all the core material 00:14:30.659 --> 00:14:33.600 keep an ear out for that opening horn call it 00:14:33.600 --> 00:14:36.039 sounds like a summons from nature echoing through 00:14:36.039 --> 00:14:39.039 a mountain valley it sets a magical tone immediately 00:14:39.039 --> 00:14:41.259 and then we get into the fast section which is 00:14:41.259 --> 00:14:43.600 full of that rhythmic drive we talked about then 00:14:43.600 --> 00:14:46.440 movement to the andante con moto this is really 00:14:46.440 --> 00:14:48.450 the emotional core of the symphony It's an A 00:14:48.450 --> 00:14:51.110 minor. It has this marching, almost trudging 00:14:51.110 --> 00:14:53.049 rhythm to it. I was reading that a lot of critics 00:14:53.049 --> 00:14:55.070 say this movement sounds like a wanderer theme. 00:14:55.610 --> 00:14:58.649 Very much so. The Wanderer was a huge symbolic 00:14:58.649 --> 00:15:02.129 figure in German romanticism. The solitary figure 00:15:02.129 --> 00:15:04.690 walking alone through nature, reflecting on life. 00:15:04.990 --> 00:15:07.789 But then midway through, it breaks into this 00:15:07.789 --> 00:15:10.909 second theme in F major that is just pure light. 00:15:11.110 --> 00:15:14.190 It's consoling. It's that bittersweet mix that 00:15:14.190 --> 00:15:16.389 Schubert does better than anyone else in history. 00:15:16.870 --> 00:15:19.909 Happy and sad at the exact same time. Then we 00:15:19.909 --> 00:15:21.929 hit the Scherzo, which is traditionally the dance 00:15:21.929 --> 00:15:24.470 movement, but here it's on steroids. Huge scale. 00:15:24.909 --> 00:15:27.990 It's vigorous, it's stomping, it has this rustic 00:15:27.990 --> 00:15:31.090 Austrian dance feel, but it's full of incredibly 00:15:31.090 --> 00:15:33.750 intricate counterpoint. And finally, the movement 00:15:33.750 --> 00:15:36.490 that broke the London violinists, the finale. 00:15:36.730 --> 00:15:39.049 The finale. This is where the energy just goes 00:15:39.049 --> 00:15:41.350 entirely off the charts. It is an endurance test 00:15:41.350 --> 00:15:43.710 for everyone on stage. And structurally, it's 00:15:43.710 --> 00:15:45.909 fascinating because it is just overflowing with 00:15:45.909 --> 00:15:48.289 ideas. A normal classical symphony might have 00:15:48.289 --> 00:15:50.799 two contrasting themes in the finale. Schubert 00:15:50.799 --> 00:15:53.740 throws in no less than six unique thematic elements 00:15:53.740 --> 00:15:55.940 in the main exposition alone. He's just showing 00:15:55.940 --> 00:15:58.159 off at this point. He has too many good ideas 00:15:58.159 --> 00:16:00.700 and has to use them all. He really had so much 00:16:00.700 --> 00:16:03.980 to say. But there is one specific moment in the 00:16:03.980 --> 00:16:06.519 finale I want everyone to listen for. It's a 00:16:06.519 --> 00:16:09.480 little musical Easter egg. Oh, I love a good 00:16:09.480 --> 00:16:12.299 Easter egg. Where is it? Midway through the development 00:16:12.299 --> 00:16:15.019 section, the woodwinds play a melody that should 00:16:15.019 --> 00:16:17.860 sound very familiar to anyone who knows classical 00:16:17.860 --> 00:16:21.889 music. It is a direct quote of the famous Ode 00:16:21.889 --> 00:16:24.590 to Joy theme from Beethoven's Ninth Symphony. 00:16:24.789 --> 00:16:27.570 Wait, really? He just straight up copies Beethoven 00:16:27.570 --> 00:16:29.690 in his own symphony? It's not copying. It's a 00:16:29.690 --> 00:16:32.740 tribute. You have to remember the timeline. Beethoven's 00:16:32.740 --> 00:16:36.000 Ninth premiered in 1824. Schubert is writing 00:16:36.000 --> 00:16:39.700 this in 1825. He is deliberately nodding to the 00:16:39.700 --> 00:16:41.879 master. He's saying, I hear what you did, and 00:16:41.879 --> 00:16:44.080 I'm walking the same path. It's a very subtle, 00:16:44.220 --> 00:16:46.460 beautiful acknowledgement. It's a total goosebump 00:16:46.460 --> 00:16:48.299 moment. It's literally a conversation between 00:16:48.299 --> 00:16:51.399 two geniuses across the staves. It is. And then, 00:16:51.460 --> 00:16:53.899 just to show he isn't a slave to Beethoven's 00:16:53.899 --> 00:16:56.679 rules, Schubert does something really weird in 00:16:56.679 --> 00:16:58.500 the recapitulation, which is the part where the 00:16:58.500 --> 00:17:00.580 main themes come back at the end. Usually you 00:17:00.580 --> 00:17:02.120 have to come back to the home. key there, right? 00:17:02.220 --> 00:17:04.940 To C major. That's the golden rule of sonata 00:17:04.940 --> 00:17:07.440 form. You start at home, you go on an adventure, 00:17:07.700 --> 00:17:11.160 and you must come home. But Schubert, he brings 00:17:11.160 --> 00:17:14.279 the themes back in E flat major. Why break the 00:17:14.279 --> 00:17:17.359 rule there? It delays the resolution. It takes 00:17:17.359 --> 00:17:20.140 the scenic route home. It extends the journey, 00:17:20.200 --> 00:17:23.119 adding even more to that sense of heavenly length. 00:17:23.759 --> 00:17:26.920 He modulates from E flat to F, and only then 00:17:26.920 --> 00:17:29.400 does he finally land the plane back in C major. 00:17:29.819 --> 00:17:31.740 It's a brilliant way to keep the tension alive 00:17:31.740 --> 00:17:34.660 until the very last possible second. It sounds 00:17:34.660 --> 00:17:36.640 like a piece that is constantly pushing against 00:17:36.640 --> 00:17:38.480 the boundaries of what a symphony was legally 00:17:38.480 --> 00:17:40.640 allowed to be at the time. It absolutely was, 00:17:40.740 --> 00:17:43.339 and that's exactly why it took 10, 20, even 30 00:17:43.339 --> 00:17:45.319 years for the musical world to actually understand 00:17:45.319 --> 00:17:48.380 it. So to sum it up, we have a work that was 00:17:48.380 --> 00:17:51.079 physically too hard for the musicians to play, 00:17:51.259 --> 00:17:53.980 structurally too long for the audiences to sit 00:17:53.980 --> 00:17:56.619 through, and tonally too innovative for the critics 00:17:56.619 --> 00:17:59.569 of its day to grasp. And yet today, it is an 00:17:59.569 --> 00:18:02.750 absolute cornerstone of the repertoire. You really 00:18:02.750 --> 00:18:05.049 can't imagine the Romantic era happening without 00:18:05.049 --> 00:18:07.789 it. It paved the way for Anton Bruckner, for 00:18:07.789 --> 00:18:10.529 Gustav Mahler, really for anyone who wanted to 00:18:10.529 --> 00:18:13.210 write massive, world -building music. They all 00:18:13.210 --> 00:18:16.089 looked back at Schubert's great C major and said, 00:18:16.150 --> 00:18:18.960 OK. That is possible. It's an incredible redemption 00:18:18.960 --> 00:18:21.759 arc, even if it was severely delayed. The ultimate 00:18:21.759 --> 00:18:24.319 sleeper hit of the 19th century. I want to circle 00:18:24.319 --> 00:18:26.319 back to where we started today, the tragedy of 00:18:26.319 --> 00:18:28.579 the silence. We have this hour -long masterpiece. 00:18:28.940 --> 00:18:32.720 It's loud. It's joyous. It's incredibly triumphant. 00:18:32.839 --> 00:18:35.500 It is fiercely life -affirming music. It doesn't 00:18:35.500 --> 00:18:37.500 sound depressed or defeated at all. But the man 00:18:37.500 --> 00:18:40.380 who wrote it never heard it. He wrote those melodic 00:18:40.380 --> 00:18:42.880 trombone parts entirely in his head. He wrote 00:18:42.880 --> 00:18:45.599 that ode to joy tribute in his head. He formulated 00:18:45.599 --> 00:18:48.259 that massive exhausting finale in his head. He 00:18:48.259 --> 00:18:51.140 imagined the applause, surely. He must have imagined 00:18:51.140 --> 00:18:53.180 how it would sound echoing in a great concert 00:18:53.180 --> 00:18:56.099 hall. But he died in a city that had literally 00:18:56.099 --> 00:18:58.539 filed his greatest achievement away in a dark 00:18:58.539 --> 00:19:01.900 cabinet. That is a really heavy thought. It reminds 00:19:01.900 --> 00:19:04.079 us that sometimes the work has to speak for itself, 00:19:04.380 --> 00:19:07.779 long after the creator is gone. So here's a challenge 00:19:07.779 --> 00:19:10.000 for you listening today. If you have an hour, 00:19:10.099 --> 00:19:12.259 go find a recording and listen to the whole thing. 00:19:12.740 --> 00:19:15.579 Let the heavenly length wash over you. But if 00:19:15.579 --> 00:19:17.380 you are short on time, just skip straight to 00:19:17.380 --> 00:19:19.420 the finale, put on your headphones and turn it 00:19:19.420 --> 00:19:22.400 up. And when you hear those rushing, galloping 00:19:22.400 --> 00:19:25.400 triplets, that driving rhythm that just never 00:19:25.400 --> 00:19:28.849 stops. Don't just hear the energy of the orchestra. 00:19:29.089 --> 00:19:31.690 I want you to picture those violinists in London 00:19:31.690 --> 00:19:35.509 in 1844 collapsing in laughter. Picture them 00:19:35.509 --> 00:19:37.710 thinking it's a joke. Picture them shaking their 00:19:37.710 --> 00:19:39.470 heads because they couldn't play it. And then 00:19:39.470 --> 00:19:42.130 realize that you are listening to the sound of 00:19:42.130 --> 00:19:43.829 the future that they just couldn't hear yet. 00:19:43.970 --> 00:19:45.809 And remember that Schubert left that sound for 00:19:45.809 --> 00:19:48.089 us. He never got to experience it, but we do. 00:19:48.289 --> 00:19:51.289 A gift delivered 10 years late, but right on 00:19:51.289 --> 00:19:54.490 time. Thanks for joining us on this deep dive 00:19:54.490 --> 00:19:56.390 into Schubert's Ninth. See you next time.