Dream concert

[Peter]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
Also, not to be an apologist for Mozart (he doesn't need one!), but you might be intrigued by both the Piano Quartets (which he invented, BTW) and the 6 String Quintets (K 515 & 516 are sublime). As you know, I'm a chamber music guy, so I probably look for different qualities than others, but Mozart was a lot more than just opera and Piano Concertos, or you are depriving yourself!
Regards, Gurn

I was generalising about Mozart - I know the chamber works of his you mention and quite agree (I could also have added the Clarinet trio & quintet and the divertimento K.563) - my point was in reference to sonata form and Beethoven's models for it, which I think were primarily Haydn and C.P.E.Bach.

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

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by Peter:
I was generalising about Mozart - I know the chamber works of his you mention and quite agree (I could also have added the Clarinet trio & quintet and the divertimento K.563) - my point was in reference to sonata form and Beethoven's models for it, which I think were primarily Haydn and C.P.E.Bach.

I am not a Mozart fanatic and I don't know who modeled what on whom, but it seems to me Mozart's last symphonies, expecially nos. 35, 38, 40 and 41, are getting somewhat short shrift here. They are great masterpieces, all different, and powerful examples of sonata form in their first movements. And the last, polyphonal movement of no. 41 (the "Jupiter")...well, it is truly Olympian!

[Joy]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
And the last, polyphonal movement of no. 41 (the "Jupiter")...well, it is truly Olympian!

This being his last Symphony and is dated 1788 I believe, is truly wonderful, I agree.
One of my favourites.

Joy

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by Chaszz:
I am not a Mozart fanatic and I don't know who modeled what on whom, but it seems to me Mozart's last symphonies, expecially nos. 35, 38, 40 and 41, are getting somewhat short shrift here. They are great masterpieces, all different, and powerful examples of sonata form in their first movements. And the last, polyphonal movement of no. 41 (the "Jupiter")...well, it is truly Olympian!

chaszz,
So true! Of course most really like the Jupiter, but I'm glad you mentioned the G minor (nr 40) in the same breath, as I like it even better. And in typical Mozartean style, he didn't spread the composition out over time, these were actually written consecutively and in very short order, much as B did with nos. 5 & 6. Both of these feats of composition are notable. The only modeling point that I was trying to make earlier is that when one has heard something, it is ("easier" is the wrong word here since it doesn't account for talent, I think) such that you can build on and surpass that, while when you are at the beginning of the "thread", you are still finding yur way, so to speak. Since all classicists had done their thing before B, he can easily be defined as the culmination of that style, without taking anything away from his accomplishments (I am speaking only of the 'early period' here, of course). He makes early pioneers such as Vivaldi and Haydn seem almost naive (in the true sense) by comparison. That is why I came to their defense. Anyway, history fascinates me I suppose, and what more pleasant history to pursue than music?
Regards, Gurn

[spaceray]

Here is a Dream come true Concert from Edmonton Alberta (cold and snowy) a Carl Czerny Festival tonight the St Lawrence String Quartet played the E minor Quartet and Yarra Tal and Andreas Groethuysen played Concerto for Piano for four hands in C major Op 153 and to round off the evening Czerny's Symphony in G minor ,I had never heard any of these wonderful works .What a treat!

[Rod]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
Rod,
Certainly B was the ultimate classical style composer, naturally, that's why we are here! But he was also the at the end of a long chain, and he took the 100 years that came before him and perfected them (in his so-called Early Phase). His first 2 syphonies, his first 6 string quartets, his first 2 piano concertos, his first 3 piano trios, etc., are written, IMHO, for the express purpose of showing the world of music that he had mastered that form better than anyone before him, and he...

I would say I tend to agree with these comments above.

B was in the advantageous position of being at the end of the chain, so to speak, but prior to Beethoven I believe it was Handel and not Haydn who had the greatest command of form in music, not a person we readily connect with Classical structures. My point was that the Classical forms only became truely perfect when a perfect and disciplined artistry was also applied, and in this respect Beethoven is unique. Without Beethoven the Classical era holds little interest for me.

I too have the impression that B was deliberately competing with Mozart to prove himself. This can only be expected, any composer worthy of the name must have as their goal the bettering of the best.



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

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by spaceray:
Here is a Dream come true Concert from Edmonton Alberta (cold and snowy) a Carl Czerny Festival tonight the St Lawrence String Quartet played the E minor Quartet and Yarra Tal and Andreas Groethuysen played Concerto for Piano for four hands in C major Op 153 and to round off the evening Czerny's Symphony in G minor ,I had never heard any of these wonderful works .What a treat!

spaceray,
That sounds great! I too have never heard any Czerny, but wish to. Maybe soon. OTOH, I have heard the St Lawrences. I have their Schumann Nos 1 & 3, and their playing is splendid. I have these pieces also by the Melos Quartet, who were VERY highly regarded in their era, but the St Lawrences bring it a joie de vivre that is missing from the Melos version. I would love to hear them play anything, perhaps Op. 18 #5, one of B's best and my favorite SQ of his. I'm green.
Regards, Gurn

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by Rod:
I would say I tend to agree with these comments above.

B was in the advantageous position of being at the end of the chain, so to speak, but prior to Beethoven I believe it was Handel and not Haydn who had the greatest command of form in music, not a person we readily connect with Classical structures. My point was that the Classical forms only became truely perfect when a perfect and disciplined artistry was also applied, and in this respect Beethoven is unique. Without Beethoven the Classical era holds little interest for me.

I too have the impression that B was deliberately competing with Mozart to prove himself. This can only be expected, any composer worthy of the name must have as their goal the bettering of the best.

Rod,
Imagine my delight! Perhaps we can bring some of our other differences to detente too. I think that Mozart brought a disciplined artistry to music also. He is often sold short because he was so talented that everyone thought it was easy for him, thus devaluing his efforts. B's early music was simply talent molded by EVOLUTION, while some of his later music (particularly "mid-period") is more the result of talent and REVOLUTION. Whatever the hidden thing is (certainly, it is genius, but who of us knows what that consists of?) that B had could not be expressed until he got the 'classical' out of his system. However, even the lightweight Haydn had a 'Sturm und Drang' period in his symphonies, so maybe B's revolution was merely evolution too!?! He just did it better, once again, I think, because he was farther down (up?) the chain.
Regards, Gurn

[Peter]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
He just did it better, once again, I think, because he was farther down (up?) the chain.
Regards, Gurn

I don't go along with this 'doing it better' as though Beethoven is an improved Mozart! They were both great artists who did things differently.

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

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by Peter:
I don't go along with this 'doing it better' as though Beethoven is an improved Mozart! They were both great artists who did things differently.

Peter,
No doubt, you are correct. I didn't express myself well there, I'm afraid. The part of B's music that seems to appeal to Rod is the genuineness and emotional feeling, I think, and I meant "better" from his point of view because Mozart doesn't express emotion in his music the way B does. For example, listen to Piano Sonata K 331, which M wrote in the days immediately following the death of his mother, which tore him up emotionally, and you don't hear a hint of that emotion in his music, because music wasn't viewed as an emotional outlet for a composer at that point in time (any composer, not just M). It is only with mid-period B and on into the Romantic that music becomes a conduit for the composer to express his inner feelings. In this way, music was following the other fine arts of the Romantic period also. Not better, not worse, just different.
Regards, Gurn

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
I don't go along with this 'doing it better' as though Beethoven is an improved Mozart! They were both great artists who did things differently.

I agree with this, but no man is an island and for a long time he must have seen Mozart and Haydn as the benchmarks for his own works to be judged until he had established himself in each respective musical genre. And obviously they were influences upon the nature of B's output during this time.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
It is only with mid-period B and on into the Romantic that music becomes a conduit for the composer to express his inner feelings. In this way, music was following the other fine arts of the Romantic period also.

Of course I disagree with all of this. Just as we were getting along so nicely! Music allowed the expression of the composer's emotions long before Beethoven, and I hope you are not inferring sone direct sequence from late Beethoven to 'the Romantic' as though they are the same lineage? I suggest the Romantics only toyed with Beethoven's rhetorical style now and again, something in which they failed dismally, and that the rest (melody, harmony, sentiment, psychology, socio/politics, you name it!) had little connection with Beethoven.

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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited January 02, 2003).]

[Peter]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
For example, listen to Piano Sonata K 331, which M wrote in the days immediately following the death of his mother, which tore him up emotionally, and you don't hear a hint of that emotion in his music, because music wasn't viewed as an emotional outlet for a composer at that point in time (any composer, not just M). It is only with mid-period B and on into the Romantic that music becomes a conduit for the composer to express his inner feelings. In this way, music was following the other fine arts of the Romantic period also. Not better, not worse, just different.
Regards, Gurn

As to Beethoven expressing his inner feelings in his music, I don't hear much of that in the 2nd Symphony dating from the same year as the Heiligenstadt testament. No Classical composer (and I certainly include Beethoven in that) ever wallowed in the self-pity that you find in Tchaikovsky's Pathetique for example (had to say it even though I'm fond of the work!)

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

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by Peter:
As to Beethoven expressing his inner feelings in his music, I don't hear much of that in the 2nd Symphony dating from the same year as the Heiligenstadt testament. No Classical composer (and I certainly include Beethoven in that) ever wallowed in the self-pity that you find in Tchaikovsky's Pathetique for example (had to say it even though I'm fond of the work!)

Although quoted dates vary, in several references I find that the Second Symphony was finished BEFORE the Heiligenstadt testament was written, although they both date from 1802. Although this may be a quibble, it can shed light on the topic here, emotion expressed in music. Is it possible that the Third Symphony, written in 1803, represents Beethoven's true artistic reaction to his deafness, with its themes of heroism and fortitude? And its expansion of the symphonic form into a large philosophic structure. It is exactly here that music may be said to have passed into a new world, and perhaps largely as a result of the composer's struggle with his affliction.

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by Rod:
Of course I disagree with all of this. Just as we were getting along so nicely! Music allowed the expression of the composer's emotions long before Beethoven, and I hope you are not inferring sone direct sequence from late Beethoven to 'the Romantic' as though they are the same lineage? I suggest the Romantics only toyed with Beethoven's rhetorical style now and again, something in which they failed dismally, and that the rest (melody, harmony, sentiment, psychology, socio/politics, you name it!) had little connection with Beethoven.

Rod,
Well, I hope we will still get along nicely. No, I am implying no such thing. There are undeniably parts of Beethoven's stylings that were emulated during the early romantic. It would be difficult to argue otherwise, even for you! That does not mean that there was any sort of linear progression from one style to the next. That would be grossly simplistic and inaccurate. Also, if you think I meant that there was no emotion in music before B, then I must have expressed myself poorly again, as is my wont. In pre-romantic times, secular, non-operatic instrumental music was not intended to convey the emotion of the composer. It can be argued that with the 3rd symphony, B changed that. This work is heavily invested with the composer's emotion, which is one of the reason's that it was so startlingly different from what had come before it. Not the only thing, since it also had a variety of novel musical devices, and most importantly that special invention of B's, the symphonic sonata form, in which he applied sonata form not just to a movement which stood independently, but to the entire piece. Thus we have something REVOLUTIONARY, and, heroic aspects aside, something which passed on to later styles, not through the intent of the composer but by natural selection. That's my opinion, I may be wrong,
Regards, Gurn