Who is the greater Piano Composer: Chopin or Beethoven

[crisss]

I liked very much Chopin... when i was young, a long time ago!! Now, i prefer B'sonatas, the best , i think

[This message has been edited by crisss (edited February 27, 2004).]

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by Shane:
v russo:

soz, i hav to disagree with u ther. as far as i no, which is not a lot since im only in school, chopin didnt really like beethoven. he liked bach and mozart more. as i said tho, i cud be wrong. some1 correct me if i am.

Shane

Even though you're only in school, please tell us that you know how to spell better than that, and you are only fooling around with the language. This is more important than who is a better piano composer, Beethoven or Chopin. Please.

[urtextmeister]

Originally posted by melvyn:
Ah - so are you asking who was the best composer in terms of listening to the music, or in terms of playing it? Because you seem to be making a distinction between the two.

If Beethoven's compositions were 'musically' better, then surely there's your answer.

Melvyn.

I think there may be a distinction, but there is a strong connection. Some composers can write music that is so ingeniously written for the instrument that the ideas are immediately evident. I could conceivably write music for bassoon that is good or even great, but if no one can play it, no one will hear it and no one will ever know that my composition is great.

Some Beethoven piano music is very awkward, but we struggle with it because of the great ideas behind it. Beethoven was exceptional, however.

The ability to write idiomatically for an instrument is hugely important. You can have great ideas, but you need the vehicle--technical knowledge--to transmit them. Suppose that Shakespeare had the same universal ideas and wrote all of his plays in English, but didn't really have a good command of the language.

Maybe too hypothetical to be useful, but my point is one should not dismiss the importance of knowing one's craft.

I, too, await an explanation from Shane regarding his interesting use of language (speaking of craft).

[Peter]

Originally posted by urtextmeister:
I think there may be a distinction, but there is a strong connection. Some composers can write music that is so ingeniously written for the instrument that the ideas are immediately evident. I could conceivably write music for bassoon that is good or even great, but if no one can play it, no one will hear it and no one will ever know that my composition is great.

Some Beethoven piano music is very awkward, but we struggle with it because of the great ideas behind it. Beethoven was exceptional, however.

The ability to write idiomatically for an instrument is hugely important. You can have great ideas, but you need the vehicle--technical knowledge--to transmit them. Suppose that Shakespeare had the same universal ideas and wrote all of his plays in English, but didn't really have a good command of the language.

Maybe too hypothetical to be useful, but my point is one should not dismiss the importance of knowing one's craft.

I, too, await an explanation from Shane regarding his interesting use of language (speaking of craft).

And what could be more awkward than the fugue from Op.106? - I wonder if Beethoven ever played it to see what contortions he had inflicted on pianists brave enough to attempt it! Bach is also most uncomfortable on the piano.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[This message has been edited by Peter (edited February 27, 2004).]

[Shane]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
Even though you're only in school, please tell us that you know how to spell better than that, and you are only fooling around with the language. This is more important than who is a better piano composer, Beethoven or Chopin. Please.

lol, sorry. im used to this short hand typing when i txt and when i talk on the msn messenger. u can stil understand me rite?! (i hope!)

Shane

[spaceray]

Understand you?
Yes ,but the shorthand is annoying.
That's only my personal opinion.

[Ahmad]

Originally posted by Shane:
lol, sorry. im used to this short hand typing when i txt and when i talk on the msn messenger. u can stil understand me rite?! (i hope!)

Shane

Well,we are not on msn messenger now!
Be patient with us Shane!

[This message has been edited by Ahmad (edited February 27, 2004).]

[melvyn]

Originally posted by Shane:
lol, sorry. im used to this short hand typing when i txt and when i talk on the msn messenger. u can stil understand me rite?! (i hope!)

Shane

Does anybody have a code book?

Melvyn.

[Beyond Within]

I have an observation: Isnt it the best composers who were FIRST virtuosos at an instrument (usually piano/harpsichord), then began to compose?

I think becoming a technical God at any instrument effects how well you compose more than people think. While a lot of practice is spent on physical problems, when you learn to play a masterpiece composition, requiring brilliant technique, ...your absorbing a lot of what went into it. Your essencially studying these masterworks.

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by Shane:
lol, sorry. im used to this short hand typing when i txt and when i talk on the msn messenger. u can stil understand me rite?! (i hope!)

Shane

I can understand you. What bothers me is the possibility that I'm seeing the future of the English language, of which I am fond. If enough young people get used to typing like that I'm afraid the spelling may inevitably work its way into usage and change the language for good. And the shorthand sounds uncomfortably similar to the blocky sounds of the language I hear in rap music, where the language seems to be changing also and where I can sometimes hardly understand the lyrics although I'm not sure I want to. I know languages change, and that process can't be stopped, but we may shed a tear or two in the passing, and hope that the worst of what we are seeing and hearing will not become the norm.

Two further quibbles: 1. When the language changes enough, Shakespeare will possibly not be understood in the original and may require updating, as Chaucer more or less does now. That will be a big loss.

And, 2. You started your reply with LOL, which I thought means lots of luck. What is the meaning there, lots of luck in trying to understand your writing? Or is it just a convention to start a message that way? The way a lot of people nowadays use the word "like" for "said", as in "She was, like, 'I didn't even know the guy!'"



[This message has been edited by Chaszz (edited March 01, 2004).]

[Chris]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
2. You started your reply with LOL, which I thought means lots of luck. What is the meaning there, lots of luck in trying to understand your writing? Or is it just a convention to start a message that way? The way a lot of people nowadays use the word "like" for "said", as in "She was, like, 'I didn't even know the guy!'"

It means "laughing out loud." You need to bone up on your Internet acronyms, sir!

[This message has been edited by Chris (edited March 01, 2004).]

[Gurn Blanston]

Well, he may bone up until the cows arrive at their pasturing place, but probably won't ever be able to keep up with the corruption of the language. And nothing personal against Shane, who I find to be an earnest young man in any case, but "txt'ing" people and all that stuff, are sure to be the ruin of our language. It may be the straw that finally broke the phonetic spelling camel's back, as this has been being advanced for years by people too lazy to learn proper English, or to have any rules at all, as far as it goes. Of course, we use it too, IMHO, but I think the difference is the same as that between those of us who learned arithmetic by tables and those who used calculators. The "old fashioned way" learners knew WHY they were doing something, not just how to get the fastest answer.
BTW, the answer to the question is:
Beethoven 1
Chopin 2
I thought that was patent.


------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[This message has been edited by Gurn Blanston (edited March 01, 2004).]

[Shane]

Hello again,

Yes, lol means laugh out loud. I am very sorry for the uproar i seemed to have caused and i will stick strickly to the english language as well as i possibly can, though sometimes i may make mistake as it is my second language.

Anyway, back to the original question. i believe that while Beethoven was the better composer in general, ie orchestral, chamber etc, Chopin was and is undoubtedly the best piano composer, possibly ever. this may well be because i am a pianist as i have said and i tend to listen to piano works far more often than others. but as far as keyboard compositions are concerned, only JS Bach could possibly match Chopin's genius.

Chopin for me definitely, but Beethoven composed some magical stuff for the piano too.

Shane

[Gurn Blanston]

Shane,
OK, back on topic then! So this is why I made the choices above.
Best can cover a variety of things. Does it mean using the full capability of the instrument? If so, I think it is a tie.
Does it mean requiring the full capability of the player? If so, then it is still a tie.
Does it mean getting everything possible within the framework of the musical language that they each speak? If so, I would say "slight advantage, Beethoven".
Finally, does it mean eliciting full emotion from the listener, wrapping him/her up in the music and making them feel things that they are not always in touch with? If so, then bigger advantage Beethoven.

So, to sum up, if we were having a football match, Beethoven would win on corner kicks, I'm afraid. Which is not to say that I don't really like Chopin and find him to be an extremely entertaining composer. I do. But...


------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[King Stephen]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
An interesting article on Chopin is at
http://www.hudsonreview.com/MullenWi04.html

It contains the following, which bears on a recent thread here about varying the Diabelli Variations:

One evening, when they were all assembled in the salon, Liszt played one of Chopin’s nocturnes, to which he took the liberty of adding some embellishments. Chopin’s delicate intellectual face, which still bore the traces of recent illness, looked disturbed; at last he could not control himself any longer, and in that tone of sang froid which he sometimes assumed he said, “I beg you, my dear friend, when you do me the honor of playing my compositions, to play them as they are written or else not at all.” “Play it yourself then,” said Liszt, rising from the piano, rather piqued. “With pleasure,” answered Chopin. . . . Then he began to improvise and played for nearly an hour. And what an improvisation it was! Description would be impossible, for the feelings awakened by Chopin’s magic fingers are not transferable into words.
When he left the piano his audience were in tears; Liszt was deeply affected, and said to Chopin, as he embraced him, “Yes, my friend, you were right; works like yours ought not to be meddled with; other people’s alterations only spoil them. You are a true poet.” “Oh, it is nothing,” returned Chopin, gaily, “We each have our own style.”

To even compare Chopin to Beethoven is blasphamy. A word in your story, I personally think sums up Fryderyk Chopin's muisc, that is music to be played in the "salon". Forgive me my friends but to compare Beethoven, who it has been said played the piano like he was possessed, and who composed for solo instruments as well as for orchestra to Chopin who composed better than 95% of his music for solo piano is a bit outlandish. Because Chopin muisc is popular does not put him on a plain with LvB.
I guess it goes without saying I am not a lover of Chopin.....Sorry.