@reelsclassicos: 🎻🕵️ Shostakovich – Valsa nº 2, Suite para Orquestra de Variedades (1955–56) HAUSER – violoncelo | Orquestra Filarmônica de Zagreb 🎻 • Em 1984, uma editora soviética publicou as obras completas de Shostakovich. No décimo volume, cometeu um erro que duraria 17 anos: identificou a Suite para Orquestra de Variedades como "Suite de Jazz nº 2." O engano era compreensível. O manuscrito original da verdadeira Suite de Jazz nº 2 havia desaparecido durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial. Sem o original para comparar, ninguém percebeu a troca. Orquestras do mundo inteiro passaram a gravar e tocar a obra com o nome errado. • Em 1999, Stanley Kubrick escolheu esta valsa para abrir Eyes Wide Shut, seu último filme. A cena inicial mostra Nicole Kidman se despindo ao som da melodia. Kubrick creditou como "Suite de Jazz nº 2" — o nome falso. Ele morreu quatro dias após a edição final do filme, sem saber que havia usado o nome errado. Naquele mesmo ano, o manuscrito original da verdadeira Suite de Jazz nº 2 foi redescoberto nos arquivos da família de Shostakovich. A comparação revelou o erro de uma vez por todas. • Em 2001, a partitura foi publicada pela primeira vez com o nome correto: Suite para Orquestra de Variedades. Shostakovich havia composto a valsa em 1955 como trilha sonora para O Primeiro Echelão, um filme soviético de propaganda sobre jovens trabalhadores no Cazaquistão. A música mais elegante que ele já escreveu foi criada para uma cena de dança numa tempestade de neve, numa estepe soviética, para um filme que ninguém mais assiste. Aqui, HAUSER a toca no anfiteatro romano de Pula, na Croácia, diante de 5.000 pessoas. • 👉 Siga, o melhor da música clássica, diariamente no seu feed. • • • #shostakovich #hauser #valsa #musicaclassica

reelsclassicos
reelsclassicos
Open In TikTok:
Region: BR
Sunday 29 March 2026 17:00:44 GMT
47388
5083
118
154

Music

Download

Comments

dr.caiocruz
Caio Henrique Monteiro Cruz :
Parece o Vorcaro ou eu tô vendo muito jornal?
2026-04-02 02:52:28
31
inese.sproe5
Inese Sproģe :
2026-04-03 18:12:40
1
silbobs
Sísi :
Musicista maravilhoso, Hauser❣️Sua alma vibra em tudo que faz, deixando sua marca...amo
2026-04-01 20:59:04
12
carla.carlita869
Carla Carlita :
2026-04-01 02:40:10
1
ilieionita50
Ilie :
2026-04-03 14:45:06
1
danutavar888
DanutaVar :
💯💯💯💯 BRAWO!!!💯💯💯💯💯💯💯
2026-04-02 06:16:42
2
getaauricacaltea
geta Aurica Caltea. :
🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰❤️❤️❤️
2026-04-03 19:00:50
1
teresasowicka6
tesa :
2026-04-03 19:18:56
1
terrycann10
Terry :
dritta al cuore...che bella💗🎶👏👏👏
2026-04-07 10:41:56
1
bodnatwnrpf
Alex :
2026-04-02 19:19:39
1
ilieionita50
Ilie :
2026-04-03 14:45:22
1
julika9254
Julika :
2026-04-02 08:04:26
1
carla.carlita869
Carla Carlita :
2026-04-01 02:40:33
1
carla.carlita869
Carla Carlita :
2026-04-01 02:40:06
1
carla.carlita869
Carla Carlita :
2026-04-01 02:40:28
1
carla.carlita869
Carla Carlita :
2026-04-01 02:39:57
1
isabelhornedo
Gazella :
Meraviglioso
2026-04-03 21:36:30
1
maria34246
Maria :
2026-04-01 18:41:19
1
kazimieragadysz
Ola :
Pięknie 💋
2026-04-02 20:51:55
1
carla.carlita869
Carla Carlita :
2026-04-01 02:40:02
1
carla.carlita869
Carla Carlita :
2026-04-01 02:40:37
1
maria240269
Maria2402 :
BRAVO MAESTRO BRAVO 🥰🥰🥰
2026-04-21 17:01:56
0
carla.carlita869
Carla Carlita :
2026-04-01 02:40:41
1
To see more videos from user @reelsclassicos, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers introduced as effective bounds in mathematics, such as Skewes's bound, which in turn is much larger than a googolplex. Graham's number is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain its ordinary digital representation, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be valid. #larp #fyp #valid #tlpur #dwbi #natsuki #anime
Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers introduced as effective bounds in mathematics, such as Skewes's bound, which in turn is much larger than a googolplex. Graham's number is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain its ordinary digital representation, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be valid. #larp #fyp #valid #tlpur #dwbi #natsuki #anime

About