Beethoven - And Then ?

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
I am only a little way through this fascinating book, but so far the relationship Bach had with his early employers particularly at Weimar is shown to be quite different than that stated - Duke Wilhelm Ernst is revealed as being far from the enlightened character history portrays him.

From the musical point of view, the knowledge Bach had regarding harpsichords and organs is remarkable - he was regarded as an expert in building and tuning them at 18. Then there is his tremendous work on equal tempered tuning which bore fruit with the chromatic fantasy and fugue employing undreamt of modulations simply because before Bach they were not possible.

I watched an interesting program about what temperament Bach was actualy proposing, looking at 'codes' Bach used to indicate the tuning. This is a point of great debate apparently. But remember 'Well' and 'Equal' temperament are not one and the same. Certainly the programme did not propose the idea that Bach was using equal temperament as we have it today.

Bach to Berlioz, my idea was that he had some grand ideas but the execution is often not the best, some of the noisier numbers especially sound simply uncouth to me - it is not a matter of the music being readily understandable or otherwise on an intellectual level. I could say the same of Wagner.

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



[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 02-10-2006).]

[waldstein]

Originally posted by robert newman:


Just how many works he actually wrote I still do not know. But I'm told by several friends that he wrote ecstatically about Beethoven in prose and I will try to find some examples of this for future posts.

try this:http://www.hberlioz.com/Predecessors/beethoven.htm

[HaydnFan]

I agree with Rod in a way, that much of Schubert's symphonic music (not necessarily his songs) were unfocused and lacked a clear, distinct style (often fitting into either the Beethoven category or the Mozart category, but nevertheless, still wonderful music!!!). However, I think the B Minor symphony and Great C Major were indications of where Schubert was heading and beginning to stake out his own territory because both of these pieces, while slighly indebted to Beethoven, showed a new style, (romantic, but perhaps romantic in a different was than was Beethoven or anyone that followed). Anyone else see this?

[Peter]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:
I agree with Rod in a way, that much of Schubert's symphonic music (not necessarily his songs) were unfocused and lacked a clear, distinct style (often fitting into either the Beethoven category or the Mozart category, but nevertheless, still wonderful music!!!). However, I think the B Minor symphony and Great C Major were indications of where Schubert was heading and beginning to stake out his own territory because both of these pieces, while slighly indebted to Beethoven, showed a new style, (romantic, but perhaps romantic in a different was than was Beethoven or anyone that followed). Anyone else see this?

Yes I think Schubert can be thought of as an early Romantic more than Beethoven and had he lived longer he would probably have been described as "a Romantic composer whose early works emerged out of the classical style"!

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

[robert newman]

Berlioz wrote to a friend -

'Now that I have broken the shackles of routine, I can see a huge field opening up, which academic rules were preventing me from entering. Now that I have heard this terrifying giant Beethoven I know what stage musical art has reached, and the aim is to take it from there and push it further. Not actually further, that is impossible, he has reached the limits of art, but as far in another direction. There is a great deal of new work to be done, I can feel it with great energy - and be assured I will do it if I live'.

Hector Berlioz - Letter to a friend written 11th January 1829