Beethoven vs. Mozart - VOTE HERE!

[Frank H]

Just a general point about this sort of thread.

Why do so many people think they support their favourite composers by denigrating the music of others?

As someone who likes some of the music of Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Bruckner, Wagner, Tchaikovsky, Sibelius etc.etc., I find that sort of attitude somewhat "narrow".

It might of course mean that I have no musical discretion - but there are works by all those composers which I don't particularly like.

There are also composers whose music I find doesn't work for me at all - Bartok and Nielsen for example. But I wouldn't condemn their music merely because of that - I am aware that they must have qualities I cannot appreciate properly.

On the other hand, I don't believe quality in music is entirely subjective. For instance, I don't believe that Andrew Lloyd-Webber could be described as a great composer, even though his works are possibly even more popular than Beethoven's.

Regards to all,

Frank

[HaydnFan]

Peter69, you say that Mozart was fast and careless in his writing of music...Mozart scholars would laugh at you...nothing could be further from the truth. We know from his letters that Mozart was, although fast, as detailed and involved in his work as any composer, perhaps more than any other.

Of course, as was pointed out, there were peices where this does not apply, but many many more where it does apply.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Frank H:
Just a general point about this sort of thread.

Why do so many people think they support their favourite composers by denigrating the music of others?

Frank

Beethoven did the same I'm sure all the other big name composers did the same,m so if it is a crime we are in good company. Speaking for myself, the perceived 'narrow' focus of my interest has not been the result of neglecting the other composers, on the contrary...

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

[Frank H]

Originally posted by Rod:
Beethoven did the same I'm sure all the other big name composers did the same,m so if it is a crime we are in good company. Speaking for myself, the perceived 'narrow' focus of my interest has not been the result of neglecting the other composers, on the contrary...

I never called it a crime.

Beethoven also praised quite a few other big name composers, and so did most other composers, even the great arrogant egocentric, Wagner.

Anyone has a perfect right to prefer Bach or Handel or Haydn or any other composer, and to say so. It's largely a matter of personal taste.

What I personally find rather annoying - and it's only a personal viewpoint - is the extreme view which virtually denies that there is any worthwhile music other than that composed by one, two, or a very few composers. We have seen quite a few such extreme views in this thread. As I said, there are composers whose music I largely dislike - but I don't conclude that that in itself means that their music is worthless.

“Perhaps there is a link or perhaps there is not, but name me a good composer after Beethoven”, is what you wrote.

I’m sorry, but I do find that “narrow”, and I don’t think you are in particularly good company in making it.

I do agree with you about Jazz. However as so many people with much better musical understanding than myself love Jazz, I don’t totally write it off as a musical genre.

Frank

[This message has been edited by Frank H (edited 03-28-2006).]

[robert newman]

Peter made a marvellous post on Johann Sebastian Bach earlier here though I've only just read it for the first time (having been offline for quite a while). It's wonderful. .

[peter69]

Personally I don't like Jazz either. But since Jazz has unmistakably become a very important genre in 20th century music (and after all is, together with Blues, the foundation of all "modern" music) I thought it would be important to point out that it originated with Bach. This was merely an argument I wanted to use to say that nobody changed the face of music like Bach did. It is totally unfair to say that Bach only changed the technicality of music. If that were true, than why is Bach the most copied and parodied composer of all by his later colleagues? Why did most of the greatest composers played his music daily? Why was Bach and not Mozart/Haendel Van Beethoven's "God" (I can't recall Van Beethoven playing Mozart or Haendel very often)? Out of "technical" interest? Really...

I repeat it again, to avoid any confusion of me being "narrow-minded": Van Beethoven was one of the greatest musical geniuses of all time. And since he was, just like me, Flemish (albeit he was a 2nd generation immigrant to Germany), I should support my fellow-compatriot with all of my heart. Yet, I have to admit that Van Beethoven's music, and especially the endings, are sometimes not of the highest standard, especially in his orchestral works. He was often too blinded by his passion. But this is only a minor comment. Since Van Beethoven, JS Bach, Shubert, Debussy, Haendel etc. were all brilliant musical minds, we have to pick on the details in order to make a comparison.

I specifically did not mention Mozart because Mozart's music is - apart from a few exceptions - careless, heartless and unfinished. Although one should indeed put this in the right perspective since a lot of his music was composed before he was even 20 years old. No wonder it lacks maturity. But now take one of his best works, e.g. the Presto of his 38th symphony (Prague). How much I wish that Mozart had developed the brilliant descending (like a very fast "Lamento") theme a bit further. Unfortunately he remains on "safe" grounds without any experiment and hence it enforces predictability. The entire symphony is so typical of him: fragmented, light, whitty and lacking emotional depth. Then again, that's why he's so popular.

Now, returning to "technicalities". Bach's music was indeed quite "technical". But, I daresay that it had more emotion and passion than Van Beethoven's. Take the brilliant aria of the Adagio of the Concerto for oboe in D minor. Or the first movement of the Cantata "Liebster Gott, wenn werd ich sterben?". The alto aria from "Am abends dasselbigsten Sabbats" or the Prelude (+ fugue!!!) of his chello suite in C minor. The latter must be one of the most "passionate" pieces of music ever written! I challenge everyone of you to listen to just those four pieces of heavenly music and then come back to me and say that Bach was merely for scholars and that he had a detrimental effect on the further development of classical music. Bach has indeed written some very "technical" music. But even those breathe the deepest passion.

Again, I'm picking on details and in the end a lot of this discussion is indeed subjective. I'm only defending my "God". :-)

Peter

[Bobbie]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PDG:
[B] I do: Shakespeare didn't exist!!

*

Prove it !

[peter69]

And one more thing for those who believe that after Van Beethoven there has been nothing but decline in music:

What about e.g. Brahms, who is to my opinion probably equal to Van Beethoven? Chopin (although his music is maybe as much contested as Mozart's)? Debussy? I personally don't like all of Debussy's music. But his works for piano solo are... astonishing. No composer has ever been able to mimic a landscape/scene into music like him. True, Van Beethoven did a couple of very convincing attempts, e.g. in his 6th. But nothing like Debussy where you can actually "feel" the footprints in the snow and "see" the sailing boats pass by as if it were a Monet painting.

And one final argument pro-Bach before I'll probably get shot: there is a general consensus about Bach within the entire musical community - some people like Mozart or Van Beethoven, but all love Bach. This is unique as well. Now I was going on about Debussy, let me tell you another short story. Debussy was once asked to be in the jury of a piano contest, and he eventually agreed although he particularly hated that kind of competitions. This fact may have made him a bit irritated and therefore maybe also played a part when he made the following statement after the contest: "Now I remember again how awful Van Beethoven sounds on the piano!". For all calrity, this quote is entirely Debussy's, not mine!!!

Cheers,

Peter

[Rod]

Originally posted by Frank H:
As I said, there are composers whose music I largely dislike - but I don't conclude that that in itself means that their music is worthless.

“Perhaps there is a link or perhaps there is not, but name me a good composer after Beethoven”, is what you wrote.

I’m sorry, but I do find that “narrow”, and I don’t think you are in particularly good company in making it.

I do agree with you about Jazz. However as so many people with much better musical understanding than myself love Jazz, I don’t totally write it off as a musical genre.

Frank

[This message has been edited by Frank H (edited 03-28-2006).]

I was being a bit mischievous with the 'name a good composer after Beethoven' quote. You notice I didn't even put a question mark at the end for double effect! Don't worry about it. For me Beethoven is the absolute benchmark, I compare every note I hear by this standard. But even with Beethoven and Handel I am very particular about how the music must be performed, so my focal point is even narrower than you imagine!

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by peter69:
"Now I remember again how awful Van Beethoven sounds on the piano!". For all calrity, this quote is entirely Debussy's, not mine!!!

Cheers,

Peter

Perhaps Debussy was a Fortepiano fan like me!?


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

[atserriotserri]

Sorry but I've lost the track of some people's positions, so I prefer not to personalize my reply.

Having said that I prefer beethoven over Mozart but love Mozart music, I think that the latter's music is considered more simple ("safe" has been said) and more disaffected than Beethoven's, more passionate, emotional.

I guess is avoided one important aspect, the personality of each composer that is at least as relevant as the age when he composed, his personal situation, the time he's got to compose a piece, etc...

In their own words (don't know the context nor the source, my brother looked on books & websites quotes from and about music and mailed me):

W.A. Mozart:
"Nevertheless the passions, whether violent or not, should never be so expressed as to reach the point of causing disgust; and music, even in situations of the greatest horror, should never be painful to the ear but should flatter and charm it, and thereby always remain music."
Therefore seems that it's Mozart's decision not to deepen into those emotions but to insinuate them and provide comfort.

L. V. Beethoven:
"Music should strike fire from the heart of man, and bring tears form the eyes of woman."
Sounds like almost opposite, not to set limits or boundaries to the development of these emotions. This has taken me to a place where I can't avoid mentioning one of my favorite all time quotes: Simon Rattle,
"If anyone has conducted a Beethoven performance, and then doesn't have to go to an osteopath, then there's something wrong."

It's a matter of taste, at the end. And almost in my case, taste depens largely from the particular moment, and why not? consider that M was a master in "contention" when handling those emotions he felt necessary to put barriers, and B in moulding them into musical patterns (sorry, but I guess that if you like them, you want to justify them ).

[barata]

Originally posted by chopithoven:
Completely right what is stated above. I want to say again that this is part of the basis of my theory.

I Think that mozart is much much a better composer than beethoven. I say this because beethoven´s music is in fact very good, in fact master pieces have been wrutten, but in my opinion, the context from where beethoven comes is quite negative. his music to me lokes like a calling for help.

But mozarts on the other hand is the most complete and joyful of them all. To me, mozart is like bach only more oyfu and complete.

BUT OF COURSE THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION.

[sjwenger]

I'll cast my vote for Beethoven. I notice that the Beatles aren't on this ballot, nor is the guy who wrote the Oscar Mayer Weiner jingle : }



------------------
To learn about "The Port-Wine Sea," my parody of Patrick O'Brian's wonderful Aubrey-Maturin series, please contact me at
susanwenger@yahoo.com

To learn about "The Better Baby" book, ways to increase a baby's intelligence, health, and potentials, please use the same address.

[DavidO]

Originally posted by chopithoven:
For most people the best of them is the one they prefer, however the absolute truth I mentioned exists, and because of the merits of each composer.

Any such philosophical enquiry is worthless without a preceding enquiry into & settling on the contextual definition of "good," "better" & "best."

In short, you'd better define your terms before you apply them.

[PDG]

[quote]Originally posted by Bobbie:
[b]

Originally posted by PDG:
I do: Shakespeare didn't exist!!

*

Prove it !

Wow! I posted that line at least three years ago! Wow!! Prove it? Come on, we all know his 37 plays were really written by his wife, Francis Bacon Sandwich.