Brahms 1st as Beethovens 10th

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
On the other hand I have little time for those who seem to like every composer and wish to be taken seriously. Discernment comes with maturity!

Discernment though doesn't equal dismissal of all but 2 composers! Even within a composer's work it is necessary to be discerning - for example Beethoven may be a greater composer than say Brahms but I'd rather listen to any Brahms symphony than Beethoven's Battle Symphony. It isn't discerning to say that every note Beethoven wrote is superior to absolutely everything by anyone else, it is dismissive and there is a difference! Not all Mozart's works are on an equal level and nor are Beethoven's - this applies to most composers and recognising that is true discernment

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



[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 10-27-2004).]

[Haffner]

Originally posted by Peter:
Discernment though doesn't equal dismissal of all but 2 composers! Even within a composer's work it is necessary to be discerning - for example Beethoven may be a greater composer than say Brahms but I'd rather listen to any Brahms symphony than Beethoven's Battle Symphony. It isn't discerning to say that every note Beethoven wrote is superior to absolutely everything by anyone else, it is dismissive and there is a difference! Not all Mozart's works are on an equal level and nor are Beethoven's - this applies to most composers and recognising that is true discernment

Finally I discover that someone here other than myself has stated such things! How refreshing to see that the administrator of the forum devoted to Beethoven is wise enough to acknowledge that there exists music outside of this great composer's output and that, like all other composers, there are flaws in several of his compositions! Now, if only others could see this too, I would be entirely satisfied.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
Discernment though doesn't equal dismissal of all but 2 composers!

Apparently it does for me

Originally posted by Peter:

Even within a composer's work it is necessary to be discerning - for example Beethoven may be a greater composer than say Brahms but I'd rather listen to any Brahms symphony than Beethoven's Battle Symphony.

I'd prefer the Battle Symphony any day, especially a theatrical performance as intended!

Originally posted by Peter:

It isn't discerning to say that every note Beethoven wrote is superior to absolutely everything by anyone else, it is dismissive and there is a difference! Not all Mozart's works are on an equal level and nor are Beethoven's - this applies to most composers and recognising that is true discernment

Beethoven is consistant in applying the Beethovenian manner with music - when listening i don't really feel a sence that one of his works is better than another, all i look to is the interpretation.


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Rod]

Originally posted by Haffner:

Finally I discover that someone here other than myself has stated such things! How refreshing to see that the administrator of the forum devoted to Beethoven is wise enough to acknowledge that there exists music outside of this great composer's output and that, like all other composers, there are flaws in several of his compositions! Now, if only others could see this too, I would be entirely satisfied.

Hey I acknowledge Handel too, the King of the Theatre! A composer I suspect most Wagner fans have little time for! In certain respects he could teach Beethoven a few things as B admitted himself. But below these two for me there is a long gap to my taste.



------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
Beethoven is consistant in applying the Beethovenian manner with music - when listening i don't really feel a sence that one of his works is better than another, all i look to is the interpretation.

Beethoven himself was more charitable or dare I say discerning than yourself towards other composers - he greatly admired Palestrina, Bach, Handel, Haydn, C.P.E.Bach, Cherubini, Mozart, Gluck and even had praise for Spontini, Rossini's Barber of Seville and Weber's Der Freischutz.

That you regard all of Beethoven's works as being on an equal level is puzzling and again the great man himself didn't agree with you and I doubt you'd find many people who would. Surely you don't consider the Battle symphony to be on the same level as the 9th, or any other of the symphonies come to that?

Certainly Beethoven wrote at a fairly consitent high level, probably more so than most, but no matter how fine an interpretation of a work such as the King Stephen overture, it is not the equal of Egmont, nor is it the equal to the overture of the Marriage of Figaro.

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



[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 10-28-2004).]

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
Beethoven himself was more charitable or dare I say discerning than yourself towards other composers - he greatly admired Palestrina, Bach, Handel, Haydn, C.P.E.Bach, Cherubini, Mozart, Gluck and even had praise for Spontini, Rossini's Barber of Seville and Weber's Der Freischutz.

That you regard all of Beethoven's works as being on an equal level is puzzling and again the great man himself didn't agree with you and I doubt you'd find many people who would. Surely you don't consider the Battle symphony to be on the same level as the 9th, or any other of the symphonies come to that?

Certainly Beethoven wrote at a fairly consitent high level, probably more so than most, but no matter how fine an interpretation of a work such as the King Stephen overture, it is not the equal of Egmont, nor is it the equal to the overture of the Marriage of Figaro.

I accept Beethoven's charity but i suspect to a degree was just that...charity. When pushed into a corner his preferences came out rather more focused. And he is, of course, not including himself in his own assessment whereas we are.

I also accept Beethoven had his own favourites amongst his music, you think I don't know this? But for me this is not an issue, I like the trifles as much as the epic pieces as long as the Beethoven formula is applied and performed well. You mention the Egmont, one of the worst performed Beethoven pieces - i have a recording of King Stephen that is more satisfying than most Egmonts I've heard. I can accept a ranking of quality, but it plays almost no part in my appreciation of the music.


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[lvbfanatic]

This thread mill has become very interesting in that a careful reading of its pejoratives and praises force its readers into that quiet introspection from which emerges the recognition of their favorite musical masterpieces.

To suggest that all 19th century composers, other than LVB, are not worthy of attention is a bit strong. It is precisely because of their contrasting styles that we have the ability to distinguish their music from LVB's massive outputs.

In the 19th century... post LVB... who can really dismiss Schubert's compositions? The Great C Symphony was brilliant... and showed the massive potential that Schubert had to take on LVB's mantle. And how can anyone possibly dismiss Schubert's *Death and the Maiden*, and his 6 *Moments Musicaux*? Sadly, Schubert died too too young.

Schuman's 2nd and 3rd symphonies are outstanding masterpieces which bear heavily repeated listenings. As do a number of his chamber music works.

Brahm's 2nd and 4th Symphonies are jewels.

Mendelsohn's Octet in E has magnificence... and is worth hearing over and over again.

On the cusp of the 19th-20th centuries we have that exquisite 2nd Symphony by Siebelius.

This simply means that the 19th c. composers did try very hard to produce enduring masterpieces. Perhaps they were not as successful as LVB in most of their attempts... but to arbitrarily dismiss their efforts and turn the nose at all of their outputs would be to omit all of the spices on one's plate.



------------------
A Calm Sea and A Prosperous Voyage

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Rod:
I accept Beethoven's charity but i suspect to a degree was just that...charity. When pushed into a corner his preferences came out rather more focused. And he is, of course, not including himself in his own assessment whereas we are.

I also accept Beethoven had his own favourites amongst his music, you think I don't know this? But for me this is not an issue, I like the trifles as much as the epic pieces as long as the Beethoven formula is applied and performed well. You mention the Egmont, one of the worst performed Beethoven pieces - i have a recording of King Stephen that is more satisfying than most Egmonts I've heard. I can accept a ranking of quality, but it plays almost no part in my appreciation of the music.

Beethoven did not compose in a vacuum. His music was influenced both consciously and subconsciously by the countless other composers who came before him. Those listed by Peter certainly had their effect on the output that he had. One cannot discount those influences and pass them off as chaff without having to pass off Beethoven in the same manner because of those influences. You cannot, for example, discount Haydn without putting a mark on Beethoven.

[King Stephen]

To all who have contributed to this tread, I have found it to be very stimulating and I agree with some of the post while others leave me in a quandary. I will, after careful deliberation, continue on my merry way enjoying music that has been my main stay for many, many years but I will also enjoy finding and listening to music that may not be the equal of Beethoven or Handel but in itself is wonderful. I personally don't care what period it is from or who composed it, it is enough that I like it without dissecting its properties. Truly music is an art that effects mind, heart and if you please the soul.
If it brings joy to my life that's all that matters. If others do not like what I like all I can say is that's life.
This site has brought to me many friends in music who have in many instances directed me to works that I was not familiar with and I hope that I have done the same for them.
When I think about it, if we based our liking on a composer because he or she was 'perfect' we would have to shelve a lot of music, and on the other hand a 'perfect' composer, if one ever existed, does not mean his or her music is always at the top. To be, for the lack of a better work, stuck on one or two or even a few composers I find very sad. There is so much to heard by so many wonderful composers that I can not understand why a person would not want to pursue such a venture.
KS

[Gurn Blanston]

Indeed, this has been a very interesting thread, primarily because it showcased the lunatics among us and offered an opportunity for them to deride their favorite target: anyone else. Fortunately, our society does not provide for arbiters of taste, nor does it make allowances for one opinion outweighing another. To restrict ones listening to a narrow focus is strictly an individual choice, but to say that everyone else is tasteless is laughable and says a lot more about the people making these assertions than I am sure they would like having said if it was by someone else. There is no reason to ridicule them, they ridicule themselves quite nicely, thank you!

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
Indeed, this has been a very interesting thread, primarily because it showcased the lunatics among us and offered an opportunity for them to deride their favorite target: anyone else. Fortunately, our society does not provide for arbiters of taste, nor does it make allowances for one opinion outweighing another. To restrict ones listening to a narrow focus is strictly an individual choice, but to say that everyone else is tasteless is laughable and says a lot more about the people making these assertions than I am sure they would like having said if it was by someone else. There is no reason to ridicule them, they ridicule themselves quite nicely, thank you!

If any of this is directed at me it is a gross simplification of my position. By default you cannot claim to be discerning yet like everything at the same time. I listed 2 names, but those who list 4, 5 6 or 7 are still discounting 100's of other composers themselves so their position is little different to my own! If i find little interest in most classical music compared to what I get from Beethoven, I suggest it is for those who contradict this postion who need to explain themselves here, not me. 9 times out of 10 when I switch the radio on to a CM station i think the music is bland or downright awful and they can't even play Beethoven right most of the time after over 170 years of practice. I feel no embarrassment in making this statement!!


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 10-28-2004).]

[Gurn Blanston]

Rod,
No, actually your position has been pretty well clarified over time, I can live with it though not agreeing with it. The fact that it offers aid and comfort to those who don't share your high-minded ideals is the unfortunate by-product. Also, I think there is a very fine line between discernment and closed-mindedness, and for me, I don't think I could tread that line as closely as you do and still feel that I wasn't making gross over-simplifications. If performance can make such a difference in Beethoven and Händel, and I agree it can, then I have to accept the corollary that it can equally make as dramatic a difference in other composers as well. I know you want to have it both ways here, but you can't, except for yourself. There is simply too much great music out there to shut the door on it.


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

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
I accept Beethoven's charity but i suspect to a degree was just that...charity. When pushed into a corner his preferences came out rather more focused. And he is, of course, not including himself in his own assessment whereas we are.

I also accept Beethoven had his own favourites amongst his music, you think I don't know this? But for me this is not an issue, I like the trifles as much as the epic pieces as long as the Beethoven formula is applied and performed well. You mention the Egmont, one of the worst performed Beethoven pieces - i have a recording of King Stephen that is more satisfying than most Egmonts I've heard. I can accept a ranking of quality, but it plays almost no part in my appreciation of the music.

I'm not talking about personal perferences -Beethoven was quite sincere and discerning in recognising that Op.78 is superior to Op.27/2. He would also probably have been offended if someone thought the Battle symphony was on the same level as the 9th or if they considered the 2nd piano concerto the same as the 4th. Mozart is not consistent, of his 27 piano concertos 12 are great, of the 19 sonatas only around 5 and probably only about 6 of the 41 symphonies - but to dismiss Mozart entirely is not discerning, but as someone else said closed minded. I use Mozart as an example, but I apply this to all composers, not just the 6 or 7 mentioned - for example out of Dvorak's works only the cello concerto and the 8th symphony really appeal to me, but I don't dismiss him entirely!

That you find no other composers than Beethoven and Handel worth listening to is your choice, but it doesn't make you more discerning, clever or superior and everyone else lacking in taste as you imply! In my opinion you are missing a lot of very fine music, but I'm sure you can live with that!

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



[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 10-28-2004).]

[Rod]

If i find something not to my taste it is not closed minded, i've spent too many hours assessing the other stuff. I've heard it and to my ears this stuff just isn't as good, it's as simple as that.

I have already explained my acceptance of the relative quality of B's own works, but it never comes to my mind when i listen, it's not important. This subtlety of this point is obviously not understood here.

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by Rod:
If i find something not to my taste it is not closed minded, i've spent too many hours assessing the other stuff. I've heard it and to my ears this stuff just isn't as good, it's as simple as that.

I have already explained my acceptance of the relative quality of B's own works, but it never comes to my mind when i listen, it's not important. This subtlety of this point is obviously not understood here.

Rod,
No, I actually understand it perfectly, and I quite agree with it. This is why my preferred listening method of chronological order works so well for me, because I am not committed to only listening to the cream of the crop to be perfectly content, when it is all cream, it doesn't matter which bit was on top!
And as I said earlier, I have reluctantly come to accept that for you, the straight and narrow is OK. I DO wish you wouldn't denigrate others for having broader tastes, there is nothing wrong with that. I can love Beethoven, and so to Mozart, Haydn, Schubert, Brahms, Dvorak and Baguer, Arriaga, Spohr, Dittersdorf... there is room there for all of them. They each had something to say musically, and I am willing to discover what that may have been. It in no way affects my opinion of Beethoven to also love Mozart. Just as it does not affect my opinion of Shakespeare to love Hemingway. Large containers can take a lot of filling!



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