Max Bruch: A One-Hit Wonder?

As a master melodist, Max Bruch was constantly captivated by the violin’s unique ability to sing a melody. The millions of people who have heard his Violin Concerto No. 1 in G Minor, Op. 26. would not be surprised by Bruch’s affinity for the violin. Written at the height of the Romantic period, the "Bruch G Minor" epitomizes the violin as we know it today. Joseph Joachim, one of Germany’s most important violin virtuosos, helped polish the violinistic aspects of Bruch’s work. This was common practice; every non-violinist composer at least put their work under the advice of leading virtuosi. Still, there’s something very special about Bruch’s vision for the violin - which became a reality with Joachim’s help - that makes his first violin concerto so memorable. Maybe it is a little too memorable, however. Aside from those lucky enough to have heard the Scottish Fantasy, many classical music fans may as well believe that the violin concerto in g minor was the only thing Bruch ever wrote. In reality, Bruch wrote over 200 works - including 3 violin concertos!

The story of Bruch's 2 Forgotten Violin Concertos is one of the most captivating in all music history. Why have 2 violin concertos - ones that contain all elements that make a violin concerto special - practically become musical folklore? The fact is that poor Max Bruch simply wasn’t in the right place at the right time.

No artist wants to be a one-hit-wonder. It must feel extremely invalidating for the public to accept only one of your works, while constantly wondering why others didn’t cut it. Bruch certainly didn’t like it. By the end of his life, Bruch hated his first violin concerto. He turned down invites to performance after performance, remarking:

“The G-Minor Concerto again! I couldn’t bear to hear it even once more! My friends, play the Second Concerto, or the Scottish Fantasia for once!”

Perhaps all composers eerily happened to get only one shot at a great violin concerto. After all, Mendelssohn (besides his Concerto for Violin and Strings, which he wrote at the age of thirteen), Tchaikovsky, Sibelius, Beethoven, and Brahms only completed one violin concerto in their lifetimes. Along with Bruch’s violin concerto, concertos written by these composers comprise the standard romantic “crown jewels” that every violinist aspires to play. Season after season, these concertos will forever win places on concert programs. They will forever consume the souls of poor student violinists trying to learn them.

Still, if a composer is truly adept at writing for the violin, his works don’t just go forgotten. Even though many violin students see the Mozart concertos as stepping stones that lead to the standard Romantic concertos, 3 of his 5 concertos are highly acclaimed and regularly performed. Similarly, Bach’s violin works are all championed. In addition to his Six Sonatas and Partitas practically being a violinist’s Bible, Bach’s violin concertos are regularly played by students and concert violinists alike. As violinists themselves, both Mozart and Bach had a special understanding of the violin’s mechanics and expressive potential. They are recognized for how well they wrote for the violin.

Max Bruch is no different. His first concerto is often regarded for its lush textures, enthralling melodies, unique structure, and ingenious realization of the violin’s potential. Although the G Minor will always be unparalleled in its glory, Bruch’s did not lose his magic touch when he composed his later 2 concertos. The second and third Bruch concertos absolutely deserve to be regularly studied and performed by violinists around the world.

The G Minor concerto should not overshadow Bruch’s later concertos, but there is a reason it has become one of the most popular concertos of all time. Just like Mendelssohn, Bruch does away with the opening orchestral tutti, instead opening the concerto with a short cadenza of sorts. That little opening cadenza is one of the "richest, and most seductive" (as Joachim would put it) aspects of the work. From the G string’s sympathetic vibrations (which a violinist can achieve by vibrating the note an octave above) to a tapering high D on the e string, the opening resonates with Romantic prowess. From this opening cadenza to the lyrical second theme in the relative major, the first movement is so filled with melodies that one can't quite understand why it was called a "prelude."The broadest definition of the term "prelude" is something that introduces that which is more important. Thus, the first movement is a prelude for a few reasons. First, it is very short, so it doesn't allow for the complex development of the musical material. Secondly, the orchestra part is never very complex in any regard: not harmonically complex, with no complex textures, little interplay with the violin soloist. Bruch does not realize his potential as a symphonic writer, instead recalling something akin to the orchestra part from Chopin's piano concerti. All in all, it has very melodious yet insignificant episodes that follow a straightforward ABA format. At the end of the movement, the opening cadenza is restated with some ornamental scalar runs, then the orchestra leads directly into a second movement. The "more important" material that the first movement introduces is the second movement - the concerto's crown jewel. Unlike the first movement, the orchestra part is much more interesting, augmenting the violin part rather than just supporting it. The movement itself is far longer, allowing for more musical development than the first. The many soaring episodes within the movement often beautifully dissipate into a lulling song. Perfect for singing in the shower! Of course, the third movement is fun and folkish. It’s quite a bit more difficult than the first two movements as well! While most movements from violin concertos are relatively independent ideas, the movements from Bruch build upon each other. The three movements are so complimentary that one simply can’t get the same satisfaction by listening to one. With all of that in mind, it’s easy to see why Bruch G Minor is a hit among violinists and audiences alike.

The sad reality is that Max Bruch was far behind his time. He was a late Romantic composer who desperately clung onto the conservative German tradition set by Johannes Brahms and Felix Mendelssohn even in 1920 - when works like “The Rite of Spring” and “Pierrot Lunaire” had already been composed! The conservative Brahms was his contemporary, but that only pushed Bruch further back into the shadows. He was friends with notable violinists like Sarasate and Joachim (whom his second 2 violin concertos were written for) and had a fair income, but it just wasn’t enough to be remembered amongst giants such as Brahms, Wagner, Liszt, and even Schoenberg. That’s probably why his violin concertos are so rarely performed - and it’s not just his violin concertos either; Bruch also composed symphonies and chamber works. Works lesser in quality and scope are more often played simply because they were written by more famous composers.

Bruch’s later two concertos may not contain the same perfect combination of charm, sentiment, and virtuosity as the first, but they are still fine examples of Bruch’s profound violinistic understanding.

Just listen to that opening melody in the first movement! The second movement is particularly interesting as it is written like an operatic recitative. You can certainly feel the dramatic action conveyed by the solo part, highlighted by virtuosic sections that exceed the first concerto.

Most people don’t even know his 3rd violin concerto exists, and I can’t imagine why! It’s his most mature orchestral writing yet; finally an attempt at a traditional sonata form first movement akin to the Brahms concerto.

Both of these concertos contain exactly what the more famous ones do: certain moments that simply encapsulate the listener through their beauty. Like that moment in the third concerto at around 5:22! It’s almost as powerful as certain moments in the Brahms and Sibelius concertos!

On a broader level, experiencing these pieces was eye-opening to me. I used to assume that lesser-known works were not worth listening to at all. I thought that all works were given a fair chance and that the ones with the best musical material rose to the forefront. Boy was I wrong! There are so many social and historical factors that dictate which works are part of our standard repertoire. Although the vast majority of amazing pieces have gotten the acclaim they deserve, many have not! It’s up to our open-minded modern society to question our established repertoire so that we all can experience all of what music has to offer.