# Do we really need a Haydn?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

In honor of certain other current threads...

I mean, a composer bested only by Vivaldi in it-all-sounds-the-sameness? Wrote one symphony 106 times --- fast, slow, menuet, and fast, thank you very much. 68 pretty much identical string quartets. 62 piano sonatas. 45 piano trios and not a decent cello part in the bunch. And his baryton works, if stacked up, would reach to the orbit of Neptune. And back. (Note: For illustrative purposes only. Don't try this at home.)

Here's a guy who was kind of like Dickens, who was paid by the word.

Well, he did write a nice trumpet concerto. I'll give him that.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

Ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch--and ouch!

I'll grant the part about Dickens, though. I love "A Tale of Two Cities" but for my own reading preferences, I'd happily dispense with the rest of the lot.

But Haydn didn't deserve this jab. Be nice now!


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Well, he did write a nice trumpet concerto. I'll give him that.


A couple of nice oratorios, as well, not to mention the wonderful "Nelson Mass."


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2014)

Is an "offensive" joke from a poster known for his jocularity really "offensive"? I'm not fussed, personally.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

Besides, have you ever listened to Dittersdorf?


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Wheres the emoticon of the little guy eating popcorn. 
This will be interesting.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I have a big box set of all the Haydn symphonies.
Without Haydn, I could never sell it. It would be worthless.
I need Haydn if for nothing else, simply to get my money back on the box set.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I refuse to answer because of the absence of poll!.


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2014)

Man, this is some good popcorn, too. [Munches contentedly]


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I'm kind of mad at Herr Haydn right now because he's cost me so much money. I have all three complete sets of his symphonies, two sets of his piano sonatas, one set (and the equivalent of a set and a half more) of his quartets, and (as yet) only one set of his piano trios. But I draw the line at the baryton trios...21 discs!!! But hey, that's only five bucks a disc. Hmmm... :lol:


----------



## shangoyal (Sep 22, 2013)

Let the Haydn fleet come in and you shall be seen asking for mercy!


----------



## samurai (Apr 22, 2011)

Yes, this fleet is comprised of many, many ships!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Novelette said:


> Besides, have you ever listened to Dittersdorf?


I suddenly withdraw my criticism of Haydn.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Yea, Haydn's pretty sweet and stuff.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Sounds like you've been listening to Mozart by mistake.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Here's a guy who was kind of like Dickens, who was paid by the word.


And whose work is just as boring. We must keep the two oeuvres apart though, because put them together in one stack and they'll undergo gravitational collapse and become a black hole that will end up devouring the entire solar system.


----------



## GGluek (Dec 11, 2011)

But I still like his menuetto movements.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Precursor to Mahler's Landler movements.


----------



## jtbell (Oct 4, 2012)

KenOC said:


> I have all three complete sets of his symphonies, two sets of his piano sonatas, one set (and the equivalent of a set and a half more) of his quartets, and (as yet) only one set of his piano trios.


I'll raise you two sets of piano sonatas, minus the "half more" of string quartets. Although I've been tempted by the Buchberger set on Brilliant Classics.



> But I draw the line at the baryton trios...21 discs!!!


A wise choice, IMO, unless you're really nuts about Haydn. I say this after listening to the entire set on Brilliant Classics over the last year or so. The individual CDs on cpo and Dorian are enough as a sampler for any sane person.



> But hey, that's only five bucks a disc. Hmmm... :lol:


I waited for a sale at prestoclassical and got them for about half that.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

jtbell said:


> I waited for a sale at prestoclassical and got them for about half that.


Yes, I see the 21-disc set is available 3rd-party, new, for $47.51. That's $2.26 a disc. No no no, I will not be tempted! Now how much is that with tax and shipping...


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

Dickens wasn't paid by the word, that's a myth, his jokes are better than Haydn's as well.

Vivaldi wrote 300 violin concertos that all sound the same. I kind of agree with that but I still find lots of interest in each one and I want to hear as many as possible. Other serial composers though: Haydn, Telemann, Boccherini, Spohr etc. are more soporific and a few straws from their musical haystacks are enough for me without feeling any need to hear them all. 

I don't even know what a baryton trio is and i'm going to keep it that way.


----------



## Whistler Fred (Feb 6, 2014)

At least I do! I may not want to snatch up recordings of everything he wrote (same with Mozart, by the way) but I love many of his symphonies, string quartets, piano sonatas and "The Creation." So I'm a happier person for having his music in my life.


----------



## hreichgott (Dec 31, 2012)

Since you are so tired of Haydn why don't you send all those dusty CDs over here where someone will give them the love that they deserve.


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2014)

I like both Haydn and Vivaldi (the latter was mentioned in the OP as being of the same ilk as Haydn as someone who wrote too much in similar vein). 

I do not agree that there is anything oddly duplicating in the material they produced. They each wrote a great deal of music and it is therefore not realistic to expect everything they wrote to sound completely different from the next piece. 

For example, I was quickly flicking through some of Vivaldi's concertos a few weeks ago to try to find a work mentioned by another member and was again reminded just how much variety there is in his work. To suggest that it's all much the same, is, I think, a misconception based largely on ignorance of the full extent of Vivaldi's works. He wrote various types of sacred music, oratorios, opera, sonatas, and concertos for several types of instrument. They each embody all sorts of different tempos and moods. I have quite a large collection of Vivaldi's output and I consider it to be a vital part of my entire collection. He has long been among my favourite baroque composers.

It is the same with Haydn in most genres for which he is well known. His string quartets, piano trios, keyboard sonatas, concertos, symphonies, sacred works etc offer wide variety and high quality. Regards his symphonies, I have each of my sets set divided into several groups: early, Sturm & Drang, Paris, London, '105-108'. Some of my favourite are in the Sturm & Drang set, especially No 44 'Trauer' and No 49 'La Passione'. They are all mainly very different to each other. Among his symphonies in general, there might a few that sound rather pedestrian, but out of 100+ to choose from there is far more wheat than chaff.

If ever a "new" work of any significance was to be discovered by either of these composers, it is very likely that it would cause a lot of interest, as happened a few years ago in the case of a newly discovered piece by Vivaldi. I suspect it would create more of a stir than if an entire ship-load (I choose the word carefully) of, say, hitherto unheard Second Viennese material was amazingly to be hauled up from the sea bottom.

Not surprisingly, I do rather find all this criticism (not just in this thread) of some of the best composers' works tedious at times.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

I think an appreciation of Haydn is more heavily dependent on the qualitly of the performance than is usually the case with others, say Mozart or Beethoven, and that that may account for some of the lack of enthusiasm for his music. IMO, modern instrument performances with little or no use of period performance practice kills the charm and delicate effects which are critically important in this music.

Personally, I rank Haydn right up there with Beethoven and ahead of Mozart.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Partita said:


> *I suspect it would create more of a stir than if an entire ship-load (I choose the word carefully) of, say, hitherto unheard Second Viennese material was amazingly to be hauled up from the sea bottom.*
> 
> Not surprisingly, I do rather find all this *criticism* (not just in this thread) *of some of the best composers' works* tedious at times.


Funny timing for that last comment....


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

It's odd that Haydn's works seem to inspire an almost religious devotion. There's a voting game on another forum right now to choose his best symphonies, requiring both plus and minus votes -- it's been going on for ten days. No matter what you down-vote, somebody's mortally wounded!


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

KenOC said:


> It's odd that Haydn's works seem to inspire an almost religious devotion. There's a voting game on another forum right now to choose his best symphonies, requiring both plus and minus votes -- it's been going on for ten days. No matter what you down-vote, somebody's mortally wounded!


Ay, ay - what people do in my absence. Heresy and blasphemy on these forums - how dare they criticise the great Haydn? Amazing composer.


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

KenOC said:


> I'm kind of mad at Herr Haydn right now because he's cost me so much money. I have all three complete sets of his symphonies, two sets of his piano sonatas, one set (and the equivalent of a set and a half more) of his quartets, and (as yet) only one set of his piano trios. But I draw the line at the baryton trios...21 discs!!! But hey, that's only five bucks a disc. Hmmm... :lol:


I get the impression you just don't get or like Haydn - rather like me and Birtwistle.


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> Funny timing for that last comment....


My comment was intended only to suggest that there is likely to be very little interest among classical music fans generally should any undiscovered works of the Second Viennese School be found compared with any from the best known baroque and classical masters.


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2014)

KenOC said:


> It's odd that Haydn's works seem to inspire an almost religious devotion. There's a voting game on another forum right now to choose his best symphonies, requiring both plus and minus votes -- it's been going on for ten days. No matter what you down-vote, somebody's mortally wounded!


As a rough guess, 99.999% of the classical music population don't come anywhere near places like this or the one you are referring to, so you are making inferences about peoples' attitudes based on an extremely tiny minority of opinions.


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2014)

KenOC said:


> I'm kind of mad at Herr Haydn right now because he's cost me so much money. I have all three complete sets of his symphonies, two sets of his piano sonatas, one set (and the equivalent of a set and a half more) of his quartets, and (as yet) only one set of his piano trios. But I draw the line at the baryton trios...21 discs!!! But hey, that's only five bucks a disc. Hmmm... :lol:


A fool and his money...

At this stage in my classical career, I have no intention of buying a complete set of Haydn: I have a life!


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

KenOC said:


> In honor of certain other current threads...
> 
> I mean, a composer bested only by Vivaldi in it-all-sounds-the-sameness? Wrote one symphony 106 times --- fast, slow, menuet, and fast, thank you very much. 68 pretty much identical string quartets. 62 piano sonatas. 45 piano trios and not a decent cello part in the bunch. And his baryton works, if stacked up, would reach to the orbit of Neptune. And back. (Note: For illustrative purposes only. Don't try this at home.)
> 
> ...


Certainly Dickens' novels contain 'too much' in the way of oddball characters, subplots, and coincidences, and they were written for serialisation so they do go on too long for us moderns with so much electronic stuff to enthrall us.
Yet despite all that, Dickens was a writer of genius. No English novelist equals him for powerful denunciations, moving conversations and reflections on character, word-wizardry, brilliant satire and humour, and sheer joie de vivre. People who are 'bored' by Dickens probably just don't get him. How many of his novels have you read?

So you will realise that I take your opinion of Haydn with a lorry-load of salt! 

(PS - But I didn't realise Dickens had written a trumpet concerto - versatile guy!  )


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Getting a little off-topic here, but one of the publishers reps surprised me the other day by showing me a new edition of a Dickens work I hadn't heard of before, which I perhaps arrogantly didn't think was possible:










http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mudfog_Papers


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KenOC said:


> I'm kind of mad at Herr Haydn right now because he's cost me so much money. I have all three complete sets of his symphonies, two sets of his piano sonatas, one set (and the equivalent of a set and a half more) of his quartets, and (as yet) only one set of his piano trios. But I draw the line at the baryton trios...21 discs!!! But hey, that's only five bucks a disc. Hmmm... :lol:


Dude, free market and all that... you did not have to purchase one disc or a box set. Besides, along with that sofa set and a few other things in your house you feel the same way about as you do the Haydn collection -- that's what garage sales are for!


----------



## shangoyal (Sep 22, 2013)

Apparently, those who do not like Haydn believe that they are using their time better in criticising him than he used his time in composing.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> A fool and his money...
> 
> At this stage in my classical career, I have no intention of buying a complete set of Haydn: *I have a life!*


That you spend posting thousands of useless opinions online like the rest of us. Nice choice!


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Why should someone be ashamed of owning a lot of Haydn CDs? It's all quality music, give the guy a break. Some of it is some of the best classical ever written imo. He couldn't write any bad Music. If you want to buy a Haydn CD, power to you .


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> A fool and his money...
> 
> At this stage in my classical career, I have no intention of buying a complete set of Haydn: I have a life!


?? What's wrong with a complete set of Haydn? C'mon people, get with the times, Haydn rules.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Do we really need a post asking the question "Do we really need a Haydn?"

Well, Mozart and Beethoven really needed a Haydn, that much I can answer with confidence.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

KenOC said:


> In honor of certain other current threads...
> 
> I mean, a composer bested only by Vivaldi in it-all-sounds-the-sameness? Wrote one symphony 106 times --- fast, slow, menuet, and fast, thank you very much. 68 pretty much identical string quartets. 62 piano sonatas. 45 piano trios and not a decent cello part in the bunch. And his baryton works, if stacked up, would reach to the orbit of Neptune. And back. (Note: For illustrative purposes only. Don't try this


Sir, this is blasphemy and you are a cad!
I suggest you may choose the weapons and we duel at dawn


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Haydn man said:


> Sir, this is blasphemy and you are a cad!
> I suggest you may choose the weapons and we duel at dawn


Yeah! And the Dickens champions are queuing up too!


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2014)

shangoyal said:


> Apparently, those who do not like Haydn believe that they are using their time better in criticising him than he used his time in composing.





Vesuvius said:


> That you spend posting thousands of useless opinions online like the rest of us. Nice choice!


Let's not jump to too many conclusions about those who have made light-hearted responses to this light-hearted thread. It would be wrong to infer that I don't like Haydn just because I don't want to spend the rest of my life listening to his complete works.

And, yes, I do spend some of my life sharing "useless" opinions on this Forum instead of listening to music and doing a million and one other things I could choose to do: this is now an undesirable thing?


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

KenOC said:


> In honor of certain other current threads...
> 
> I mean, a composer bested only by Vivaldi in it-all-sounds-the-sameness? Wrote one symphony 106 times --- fast, slow, menuet, and fast, thank you very much. 68 pretty much identical string quartets. 62 piano sonatas. 45 piano trios and not a decent cello part in the bunch. And his baryton works, if stacked up, would reach to the orbit of Neptune. And back. (Note: For illustrative purposes only. Don't try this at home.)


Are you sure he wrote 106 symphonies, 68 string quartets, 62 piano sonatas, etc...?

As far as I know his production was not so big.

....
But of course you are speaking of Michael Haydn, I suppose. Aren't you?


----------



## Kivimees (Feb 16, 2013)

Ingélou said:


> Yet despite all that, Dickens was a writer of genius. No English novelist equals him for powerful denunciations, moving conversations and reflections on character, word-wizardry, brilliant satire and humour, and sheer joie de vivre. People who are 'bored' by Dickens probably just don't get him.


You tell 'im, Ingélou!


----------



## shangoyal (Sep 22, 2013)

Yeah, Dickens is amazing. People who don't agree either have read too much Nabokov or have had the right side of their brains removed surgically.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

It was the best of times; it was the worst of times....

Okay that ends my description of the last few weeks on TC.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I can't believe this question coming from KenOC, the most ardent Beethoven admirer in the forum. Didn't Haydn _invent_ the string quartet, as well as shaping the symphonic form? i.e. there would be no Beethoven without Haydn. Come on, now. Have you flipped your powdered wig?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

We need Haydn for the simple reason that he wrote The Creation.

We also needed Wunderlich, Janowitz, Karajan and co to give us one of the greatest recordings ever!


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> Let's not jump to too many conclusions about those who have made light-hearted responses to this light-hearted thread. It would be wrong to infer that I don't like Haydn just because I don't want to spend the rest of my life listening to his complete works.
> 
> And, yes, I do spend some of my life sharing "useless" opinions on this Forum instead of listening to music and doing a million and one other things I could choose to do: this is now an undesirable thing?


Your post didn't seem light-hearted to me… seemed arrogant. Maybe you were joking, or maybe you're just crawfishin' now…. Forget about it.


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2014)

Vesuvius said:


> Your post didn't seem light-hearted to me… seemed arrogant. Maybe you were joking, or maybe you're just crawfishin' now…. Forget about it.


What...that I'm arrogant, that I try to take back my posts, and that I misrepresented that arrogance as light-heartedness?

Yes, I suppose you're right, nothing to worry about. I mean, if you're opinion of me mattered...


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

millionrainbows said:


> ... i.e. there would be no Beethoven without Haydn. Come on, now. Have you flipped your powdered wig?


As Beethoven himself said, "I learned nothing from Haydn."


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

shangoyal said:


> Apparently, those who do not like Haydn believe that they are using their time better in criticising him than he used his time in composing.


I must take issue with your premise. How can anybody NOT like Haydn?


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

What is this cheeky ****** Ken? I thought you were cool and liked Haydn...


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

clavichorder said:


> What is this cheeky ****** Ken? I thought you were cool and liked Haydn...


I know, I thought he was cool too .


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Death, taxes and Haydn. That's all you need to know.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Death, taxes and Haydn. That's all you need to know.


Can you really simplify life to these three things?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Can you really simplify life to these three things?


Wish I could change the first two!


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Wish I could change the first two!


Hehe, listening to Haydn's 'L'Impériale' symphony right now, so excellent.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Hehe, listening to Haydn's 'L'Impériale' symphony right now, so excellent.


Hey, I know that one! It's the one with a fast part, then a slower part, then kind of a minuet, and then a fast part again. Right?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Like: Beethoven never followed a formula; Brahms never followed a formula; Bruckner never followed a formula; Mozart never followed a formula; Chopin never followed a formula; Schubert never followed a formula; W Schuman never followed a formula; Prokofiev never followed a formula.....???

Quanto sia assurdo!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Well, I'm listening now to Haydn's quartet Op. 64 #6, the Lindsays. Self-punishment, you understand!

A regular Percy Grainger, I am. Except for the mother part of course.


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2014)

KenOC said:


> As Beethoven himself said, "I learned nothing from Haydn."


Apart from monothematicism?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

TalkingHead said:


> Apart from monothematicism?


Well, I've always taken that quote to refer to Beethoven's formal lessons from Haydn. If taken more broadly, it would be like a fish saying he didn't need water to swim. Nobody's that arrogant, even Beethoven (I think).

In any event they had their issues with each other. Haydn referred to Beethoven as "the great moghul". And he wasn't easily riled.


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2014)

Yeah, OK Ken. Beethoven learned his craft in great part from Haydn, despite his protestations to the contrary.


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2014)

LvB Op. 18 is a case in point.


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2014)

And as for his (LvB's) attempts at Masses, Haydn pooed on him. So there.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> What...that I'm arrogant, that I try to take back my posts, and that I misrepresented that arrogance as light-heartedness?
> 
> Yes, I suppose you're right, nothing to worry about. I mean, if you're opinion of me mattered...


Hey, I've been wrong a couple times before. Context doesn't always translate well on a forum.

Don't be so arrogant towards my arrogance.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> Wrote one symphony 106 times --- fast, slow, menuet, and fast, thank you very much. 68 pretty much identical string quartets. 62 piano sonatas. 45 piano trios and not a decent cello part in the bunch.


 I am not opposed to Haydn but then I have not experienced that much of his music, but an interesting statement that may help explain your frustration with Haydn is in Roland Romain's book Beethoven the Creator:


> After this [Beethoven's completion of the Appassionata] the conqueror does not renew the same combat. It is not in his nature to return on his own traces, after the manner of Haydn and Mozart, who, when a work pleased them, made a whole series of cakes out of the same flower.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

So is Haydn a god or garbage?
I think not!! :devil:


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

KenOC said:


> I suddenly withdraw my criticism of Haydn.


Many thanks, Kenny!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hreichgott said:


> Since you are so tired of Haydn why don't you send all those dusty CDs over here where someone will give them the love that they deserve.


...something about "my cold, dead hands"...


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Ay, ay - what people do in my absence. Heresy and blasphemy on these forums - how dare they criticise the great Haydn? Amazing composer.


Yes it is heresy and blasthemy. We owe nothing but total reverence and awe to this man, "father of the symphony" (well, not exactly, but may as well be!) and "father of the string quartet" (ditto, but again he lifted the genre to the heights of um Olympus or Valhalla or whatever).

We will establish a committee of inquiry into Anti-Haydn Subversives on this forum. The formation of this committee will be totally democratic. I therefore nominate you as chairperson. I will be honorary secretary. The committee will have a balance of opinion of those for and against the question "Does Haydn rock?" However, those against that notion will be automatically barred from the committee once they have voiced their dissent.



hpowders said:


> Like: Beethoven never followed a formula; Brahms never followed a formula; Bruckner never followed a formula; Mozart never followed a formula; Chopin never followed a formula; Schubert never followed a formula; W Schuman never followed a formula; Prokofiev never followed a formula.....???
> 
> Quanto sia assurdo!


Yes they all reinvented the wheel. There is no such thing as influence, there is only TOTAL originality. Only with that can you be a GREAT composer! We raise you up, you get your 15 minutes of fame, then for 100 years (as with Bach) or 150 (as with Papa...and his buddy The Red Priest, at whose funeral he sang in Vienna) you are doomed to oblivion. Then the critical tide turns and you TOTALLY ROCK.

That is the rule: ideology beats music every time guys! Beethoven was not influenced by Haydn, or Mozart or anyone else. He just sprung forth from nothing! And he got rid of sewing machines, wigs and those silly stockings, that was his greatest contribution to music (and that Lion-like hairdo and "look I'm so serious and in such deep thought" sor of look - everyone tried to copy that since, but there is only one original: LvB).

But I think people know the serious answer to this question: Haydn does indeed rock. And don't degrade him by calling him Papa (midwife to Beethoven). Don't you dare! Oops, I just did before, oh well...


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Sid James said:


> Yes it is heresy and blasthemy. We owe nothing but total reverence and awe to this man, "father of the symphony" (well, not exactly, but may as well be!) and "father of the string quartet" (ditto, but again he lifted the genre to the heights of um Olympus or Valhalla or whatever).
> 
> We will establish a committee of inquiry into Anti-Haydn Subversives on this forum. The formation of this committee will be totally democratic. I therefore nominate you as chairperson. I will be honorary secretary. The committee will have a balance of opinion of those for and against the question "Does Haydn rock?" However, those against that notion will be automatically barred from the committee once they have voiced their dissent.
> 
> ...


I love Haydn and I'm extremely particular, throwing many other composers under the bus in my time.
Haydn is one of the few survivors still riding on that bus.


----------



## hreichgott (Dec 31, 2012)

KenOC said:


> ...something about "my cold, dead hands"...


Can't blame me for trying...

(I was pretty sure the OP was a joke, but if not, my offer to take the Haydn off your hands remains open)


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hreichgott said:


> (I was pretty sure the OP was a joke, but if not, my offer to take the Haydn off your hands remains open)


Can't believe this was milked for five pages...my bonus will be pretty good!

Next up: Beethoven, whose reputation is built entirely on gossip (thanks Glenn!)


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2014)

hpowders said:


> So is Haydn a god or garbage?
> I think not!! :devil:


Well he must be one or the other...surely, there's nothing in between??


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

KenOC said:


> Can't believe this was milked for five pages...my bonus will be pretty good!
> 
> Next up: Beethoven, whose reputation is built entirely on gossip (thanks Glenn!)


There's been an 'an hommage' thread to Beethoven (http://www.talkclassical.com/27139-beethoven-worst-composer-homage.html). Which also makes me think that considering what is said here that it would be more accurate in the sense of this forum (not actuality) to say his 'reputation is build entirely on hommage', as in he's supposed to have influenced everything.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

For a while I was puzzled why anybody would listen to Haydn. But now my understanding is much deeper. He is like the coffee beans at a perfume shop or pickled ginger you get with sushi. His suitably neutral, and squarely tonal pieces are excellent to cleanse the palate in-between your serious listening. Space your Tchaikovsky symphony and Beethoven concerto with a Haydn symphony to reset your framework to properly appreciate the Beethoven in unto itself apart from the Tchaikovsky.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

hpowders said:


> I love Haydn and I'm extremely particular, throwing many other composers under the bus in my time.
> Haydn is one of the few survivors still riding on that bus.


Well good to hear that, but I suppose there are worse sins than (metaphorically) throwing a dead composer off a moving vehicle. You remember that film _Throw Momma from the Train_? Now that's worse, even though Momma was crumudgeonly as hell.

BTW if we want to be historically appropriate it has to be a carriage, not a bus. All truly great composers lived in the age of the horse and carriage. Especially ones that had leonine hairdos (Beethoven), or bouffant hairdos (Berlioz) or expensive velvet berets (Wagner). Once motor cars and buses came in, it was ruination for music. I suppose trains are okay, they are still from the age of steam (well, apart from that horrible Honegger piece).


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Sid James said:


> Well good to hear that, but I suppose there are worse sins than (metaphorically) throwing a dead composer off a moving vehicle. You remember that film _Throw Momma from the Train_? Now that's worse, even though Momma was crumudgeonly as hell.
> 
> BTW if we want to be historically appropriate it has to be a carriage, not a bus. All truly great composers lived in the age of the horse and carriage. Especially ones that had leonine hairdos (Beethoven), or bouffant hairdos (Berlioz) or expensive velvet berets (Wagner). Once motor cars and buses came in, it was ruination for music. I suppose trains are okay, they are still from the age of steam (well, apart from that horrible Honegger piece).


Thanks for correcting me!


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Couchie said:


> For a while I was puzzled why anybody would listen to Haydn. But now my understanding is much deeper. He is like the coffee beans at a perfume shop or pickled ginger you get with sushi. His suitably neutral, and squarely tonal pieces are excellent to cleanse the palate in-between your serious listening. Space your Tchaikovsky symphony and Beethoven concerto with a Haydn symphony to reset your framework to properly appreciate the Beethoven in unto itself apart from the Tchaikovsky.


Strangely enough, I've been noticing similarities in the way Haydn and Wagner composed. I can't put my finger on exactly what it is, but it probably has something to do with patience and attention to detail.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Thanks for correcting me!


hpowders, you've changed your face!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Not in the pithiness department.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Not in the pithiness department.


Who's the dude on your avatar?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Who's the dude on your avatar?


Vincent Persichetti!!! American composer, mid 20th century. Thanks for asking. 

I got sick of looking at a death mask!


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Couchie said:


> For a while I was puzzled why anybody would listen to Haydn. But now my understanding is much deeper. He is like the coffee beans at a perfume shop or pickled ginger you get with sushi. His suitably neutral, and squarely tonal pieces are excellent to cleanse the palate in-between your serious listening. Space your Tchaikovsky symphony and Beethoven concerto with a Haydn symphony to reset your framework to properly appreciate the Beethoven in unto itself apart from the Tchaikovsky.


Is this for real? 
I'm tired today, but is Couchie suggesting Haydn is not 'serious'? That Haydn's music isn't worth listening to for its intrinsic merits? Really????


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

He better be worth listening to! I just ordered a fourth boxed set of symphonies. #93-#104.

Let me know if he's really not worth it! I still have time to stop the shipment! :lol:


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Vincent Persichetti!!! American composer, mid 20th century. Thanks for asking.
> 
> I got sick of looking at a death mask!


Yes, I was a bit creeped out by it too - hehe, no offence to the great composer depicted on the mask, however .


----------



## Wood (Feb 21, 2013)

Alydon said:


> I get the impression you just don't get or like Haydn - rather like me and* Birtwistle.*


Hey! Beware the man with the fork!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Strangely enough, I've been noticing similarities in the way Haydn and Wagner composed. I can't put my finger on exactly what it is, but it probably has something to do with patience and attention to detail.


I read once that Wagner sometimes used some of the same notes that Haydn used. And without attribution! A regular John Williams he was...


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Yes, I was a bit creeped out by it too - hehe, no offence to the great composer depicted on the mask, however .


Sorry about that!


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

I had a Haydn at Salieri.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Headphone Hermit said:


> Is this for real?
> I'm tired today, but is Couchie suggesting Haydn is not 'serious'? That Haydn's music isn't worth listening to for its intrinsic merits? Really????


Haydn is about as serious as a gay dolphin at SeaWorld.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Couchie said:


> Haydn is about as serious as a gay dolphin at SeaWorld.


It's not surprising worms have such silly opinions.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I'm in such a silly, non-serious mood today I think I'll listen to The Creation; a laugh a minute!


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

I don't like Haydn's music, but he did invent the symphony, and string quartet.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

There are only 2 acknowledged magnificent oratorios ever written.
Haydn penned one of them, The Creation. That's really all one needs to know.
Anybody unfamiliar with this masterpiece needs to hear it.
Therefore, in my opinion, the original thread query is ridiculous.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

Nor a punch, nor a twist, nor a twinkle - but an endless self-indulgence. That's a Haydn for ya! Do I need this? Not really.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Do we really need bread for a sandwich?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

No you don't.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Serge said:


> Nor a punch, nor a twist, nor a twinkle - but an endless self-indulgence. That's a Haydn for ya! Do I need this? Not really.


Haydn and self-indulgence? Maybe in terms of his humour, but that's one of the greatest aspects of his music imo. Other than that, Haydn wrote very coherent, thematically linked pieces of music that showed formal balance and used counterpoint to splice in references to the 'learned' style, which isn't an example of self-indulgence. Self-indlugence would be breaking all conventions with complete disregard for what the audience wants to hear. Haydn did break rules quite often, but he always did this in the context of works which were immediately appealing at the same time.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Haydn and self-indulgence? Maybe in terms of his humour, but that's one of the greatest aspects of his music imo. Other than that, Haydn wrote very coherent, thematically linked pieces of music that showed formal balance and used counterpoint to splice in references to the 'learned' style, which isn't an example of self-indulgence. Self-indlugence would be breaking all conventions with complete disregard for what the audience wants to hear. Haydn did break rules quite often, but he always did this in the context of works which were immediately appealing at the same time.


And, FWIW, the rules he often broke were his own.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

hpowders said:


> No you don't.


Right. Let him be _your_ bread AND butter.


----------



## Rhombic (Oct 28, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Sounds like you've been listening to Mozart by mistake.


Great one!

Now, seriously, Haydn is not that innovative, but come on, if you compare his music, which is repetitive, to Mozart's, which is repetitive AND boring AND shockingly overrated... I would suggest to the OP Haydn's 31st symphony, where the amazing use of the limited horn possibilities (for that time) is fabulous. By the way, Haydn's two horn concertos are far more interesting (and challenging :lol than those of Mozart.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Well, one thing's for certain: Haydn's music is here to stay.


----------



## Muddy (Feb 5, 2012)

Wow, both Haydn AND Dickens tossed under the bus. This is an absolute outrage! Haydn's quartets alone make him essential. And as for Dickens, a world without Mr. and Mrs. Micawber, Betsey Trotwood, Scrooge, Uriah Heep, Miss Havisham, Mr Dick, Traddles, Dick Swiveller, the Murdstones, Mr. F's Aunt, Mrs Gamp, Pecksniff, Inspector Bucket, Sam Weller and his dad, to name just a few...would be a dull place, indeed.


----------



## Oskaar (Mar 17, 2011)

There is a lot of breathing room in Haydns works, in oposite to mozart, but I must admit that I have not reached to explore him yet. But I have really appreciated what I have heard, and his humble approach, and big brething room, gives the performers big room for personal identiy-stamp on a performance. When I search for a good listen this is as important for me as the work itself.

Telemann, Vivaldi, and also Bach works like that for me also. Mozart also, but he have already packed so much into the work that make me and maybe the artist breathless. But some genious artists find a way to tame mozart.  (This is just quasiintellectual impulse thaughts from me, I am absolutely no expert, but it is my sensire thaughts)


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I love to crank up the "Surprise" symphony and make everybody do the jerk.


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

My mum was always telling me I needed a damn good Haydn. (or was it hiding, her diction was quite poor)
So the answer is yes!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

^^^ Heh! Heh! Very funny!

My ma was in the tea business, always telling me I need some good tannin.


----------



## Oskaar (Mar 17, 2011)

MagneticGhost said:


> or was it hiding....


 What had you done?


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

oskaar said:


> What had you done?


It was all so long ago, it's difficult to remember. Probably telling bad jokes though!


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> No you don't.


Blast, this'll take weeks to repair!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Vesuvius said:


> Blast, this'll take weeks to repair!


I wouldn't worry about it. Nobody's paying attention. Follows natural law: a thread in motion....
With bread; without bread....


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> I wouldn't worry about it. Nobody's paying attention. Follows natural law: a thread in motion....
> With bread; without bread....


Dang, I suspected that everyone stopped what they were doing to read my posts. I guess enlightenment isn't on the top of their list….


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Vesuvius said:


> Dang, I suspected that everyone stopped what they were doing to read my posts. I guess enlightenment isn't on the top of their list….


Enlightenment certainly tops my list! Well, unless I'm really hungry, and then a nice ham sandwich might pull ahead.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

If for nothing else, Haydn composed one of the greatest works in human history which can stand up to anything Bach, Beethoven, Mozart and Handel wrote and that is:

The Creation.

There is no work written that I have ever heard and I've heard plenty, that can move me to tears like the final chorus of The Creation. 

It leaves me limp, exhausted and in tears to be an ear witness to such greatness. No other piece of music can do that to me.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is yes, we really do need a Haydn. Absolutely indispensable!

Proof that there is hope after all for humanity.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Vesuvius said:


> Dang, I suspected that everyone stopped what they were doing to read my posts. I guess enlightenment isn't on the top of their list….


If it was, they'd be listening to music.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I was just wondering that with 104 symphonies written, would any one notice if a performance had different movements from different symphonies stuck together? First movement of symphony 67, then the orchestra played the second movement from symphony 47, then the third movement from symphony 83, and the finale is the fourth movement from symphony 56. How many people in the audience would notice?

(Think of the near limitless combinations)

You couldn't easily get away with that with a performance of Beethoven or Mahler symphonies, more people would notice.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

HaydnBearstheClock would notice! 

I see what you're saying. But surely Beethoven is much more famous, and Mahler wrote fewer for people to know.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

senza sordino said:


> I was just wondering that with 104 symphonies written, would any one notice if a performance had different movements from different symphonies stuck together?


106 actually. There was a late-night classical DJ some years ago who regularly featured "synthetic" Haydn symphonies made of disparate movements. He did this for years and nobody ever noticed. I draw no conclusions!


----------



## Oreb (Aug 8, 2013)

Say what you like about Haydn - I don't care - but criticise the author of the greatest novels in English - _Bleak House, Little Dorritt, Dombey and Son_ and _David Copperfield_ - and we have a problem!

Anyone who does that is, as they say, on a haydn to nothing.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

To be fair to Haydn, we should consider his music in the context of his time - as with any other composer of course. In that sense, he very much was a trailblazer without a doubt, and, to say the least, without Haydn there surely wouldn't be a Mozart as we know him.

That said, interesting what the music of Mozart would be otherwise. Makes you think, huh?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Oreb said:


> Say what you like about Haydn - I don't care - but criticise the author of the greatest novels in English - _Bleak House, Little Dorritt, Dombey and Son_ and _David Copperfield_ - and we have a problem!
> 
> Anyone who does that is, as they say, on a haydn to nothing.


Well on TC we often share the best of times....and occasionally, the worst of times.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I think anyone here who denies the influence of Haydn on Beethoven is not listening intuitively or intelligently, and it seems they must resort to off-the-wall quotations or 'gimmicks' to make that point.

When I listen to Haydn, such as his String Quartets Op. 76 Nos. 4, 5, & 6, I hear all kinds of 'gestures' which correspond with Beethoven's quartets, even the late-period ones. Haydn's Quartet No. 4 in Bb, in the finale, has abrupt starts and stops, very reminiscent of Beethoven's late quartet in F. I hear textures throughout, in voicing and phrasing, which seem to have influenced Beethoven. The writing in the lower voices is very perceptive, and I'm sure this is one of those factors.

Of course, it's hard to 'prove' these intuitive, stylistic gestures; one must have good ear/brain function, and be a 'man of refined taste' to hear such things.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> I think anyone here who denies the influence of Haydn on Beethoven is not listening intuitively or intelligently, and it seems they must resort to off-the-wall quotations or 'gimmicks' to make that point.
> 
> When I listen to Haydn, such as his String Quartets Op. 76 Nos. 4, 5, & 6, I hear all kinds of 'gestures' which correspond with Beethoven's quartets, even the late-period ones. Haydn's Quartet No. 4 in Bb, in the finale, has abrupt starts and stops, very reminiscent of Beethoven's late quartet in F. I hear textures throughout, in voicing and phrasing, which seem to have influenced Beethoven. The writing in the lower voices is very perceptive, and I'm sure this is one of those factors.
> 
> Of course, it's hard to 'prove' these intuitive, stylistic gestures; one must have good ear/brain function, and be a 'man of refined taste' to hear such things.


I think the main similarity was in how they used small blocks to build entire movements - for eg. the 1st movements of Beethoven's 5th and Haydn's Fifths quartet (now that I notice, sort of funny how these two works have to do with 5). By the way, millionrainbows, which Op. 76 set do you prefer?


----------



## Oskaar (Mar 17, 2011)

millionrainbows said:


> Of course, it's hard to 'prove' these intuitive, stylistic gestures; one must have good ear/brain function, and be a 'man of refined taste' to hear such things.


I just listen. I am a simple man with absolutely no theoretical musical knowledge. I dont listen to music intellectually. But I have developed a good listening ear through prog rock, jazz, classical, pop rock and world music during the last 10 years. It is about hitting a spot in me. Yestrday I discovered that Shumann did that with his orchestral music.
And I love Haydn!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Yeah. A lot of us here seem to love Haydn. I may visit London one day as tribute.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Yeah. A lot of us here seem to love Haydn. I may visit London one day as tribute.


Maybe you'll have Haydn's luck: "Three thousand gulden in one night. Only in London!" (real quote from one of his letters BTW)


----------



## Guest (Mar 11, 2014)

I recall a few years ago coming across book called "Haydn Studies", in the Cambridge Composer Studies. It comprised a number of essays on Haydn by various authors. I picked it up in a library and spent a couple of hours glancing through some of it. I see that it is still in print. 

One of the main things I recall is that, whilst Haydn has long been highly respected as one of the most innovative composers, he has never cut it for a place on the top table of the most distinguished composers. During much of the 19th C he was largely marginalised in favour of Mozart, Beethoven, and J S Bach. Hardly any of the big name composers paid much attention as a source of inspiration, except Brahms who wrote a famous piece which he wrongly attributed to Haydn, his "Variations on a Theme by Haydn, Op 56 a". During the 20th C a similar broad trend continued, but with perhaps rather greater interest these days.

Especially during the 19th C, Haydn's music was seen as being well written, expressive, amusing, and somewhat jocular at times, but was not held in the same profound way as that of the others mentioned above. A common view was that whilst Mozart may have learned some tricks of the trade from Haydn, it was Mozart's later works (once he had matured) which inspired Haydn to write most of his better-known works. The irony here, of course, is that if it had not been for Mozart then Haydn's reputation today would not be as good as it is. Even today, Haydn's name on a concert programme is hardly a big crowd puller. When a Haydn work is scheduled, it seems to be rarely the main item.

There is tons of very interesting material in the various studies, of which the above observations are a mere speck. It is sources of information like that contained in well-written essays in this book referred to that are really worth reading …. 

I am not saying any of this because I dislike Haydn in any way. Completely on the contrary, I value his music a great deal. He is among my top 10. Personally, I rate Haydn on a rough par with Brahms and above the likes of Wagner, Mahler, and Tchaikovsky. After many years of listening and comparing, I still find that he lacks that extra sparkle of genius of which the likes of Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, and Schubert were capable.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Partita said:


> I recall a few years ago coming across book called "Haydn Studies", in the Cambridge Composer Studies. It comprised a number of essays on Haydn by various authors. I picked it up in a library and spent a couple of hours glancing through some of it. I see that it is still in print.
> 
> One of the main things I recall is that, whilst Haydn has long been highly respected as one of the most innovative composers, he has never cut it for a place on the top table of the most distinguished composers. During much of the 19th C he was largely marginalised in favour of Mozart, Beethoven, and J S Bach. Hardly any of the big name composers paid much attention as a source of inspiration, except Brahms who wrote a famous piece which he wrongly attributed to Haydn, his "Variations on a Theme by Haydn, Op 56 a". During the 20th C a similar broad trend continued, but with perhaps rather greater interest these days.
> 
> ...


Well, it depends on what kind of genius you're looking for - all of these composers were great in their own way. Bach, Beethoven, Mozart and Schubert were terrific, but somehow Haydn is, for me, more fun to listen to.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

My take: You'll hardly find a Haydn work that will make you say, "Omigod this has changed my life!" But if you listen to Haydn regularly, you might find that your life has been changed for the better, if maybe only a little. And that's not a bad thing.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I hear major similarities in the basic harmonic language of both Haydn and Beethoven, to be frank I find both composers boring harmonically, but they made up for it in other areas. Both composers I consider extremely over-rated on these forums - Beethoven I think is the most over-rated composer of all time, though he might still make my top ten list (if I was estimating "greatness" not favorite) - Haydn wouldn't come close.


----------



## Guest (Mar 11, 2014)

KenOC said:


> My take: You'll hardly find a Haydn work that will make you say, "Omigod this has changed my life!" But if you listen to Haydn regularly, you might find that your life has been changed for the better, if maybe only a little. And that's not a bad thing.


My take is that it takes many years (not just a few), and a great deal of listening, to allow time for the music of all the great composers to wash over you, not just their popular works but also delving much more deeply into their less well known output, in order to form a proper view about one's underlying appreciation of all the major composers.

As a general rule, the greater the amount of listening the more tolerant one becomes about the works of a wider range of composers. People who genuinely have a good knowledege don't usually go around slagging off any the major composers. They might express preferences but even here I haven't noticed much of that among people who are really well clued up.

I'm convinced from many (not all) of the comments I have seen all over this Board that expressions of dislikes for certain composers are based largely or entirely on lack of experience. I'm not suggesting for a moment that these negative comments are baseless. They probably do reflect the opinions of the poster concerned at his/her present juncture, but I am pretty sure that this experience is limited both in terms of time spent and the amount of material investigated. I can tell that from the general tone of other comments they make.

Again, by the same token, it's easy to spot the Beethoven [or other] "fan boys", who rave on and on about a single composer, as if everyone else is "chopped liver". The majority of this "fan boy" mentality is, I reckon, part of the usual maturing process in becoming au fait with classical music generally. Classical music is such a vast area that perforce people have to takes things bit by bit, and be selective. In the process of doing this, some folk (again not all) become almost completely mesmerised by one, or maybe two or three, composers to the virtual exclusion of most others, except perhaps the occasional glance in the latters' direction. Some such people seem to find it difficult to look beyond their noses and anticipate one day that they too might develop a much wider set of composers in whom they become interested.

And then we have the category of listener who has graduated beyond Beethoven "fan-boy" and has become, overnight almost, an expert on one or two "greats". They start making bold assertions about various other composers' alleged weaknesses in certain areas, but upon closer inspection it turns out they have about 4 CDs, and have done little more than scratch the surface, let alone allowed sufficient time to absorb any of it in a proper manner.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

I agree, time is needed. People are just too impatient now, they want to feel they have the knowledge quickly so they then feel they are more important in their own eyes on a forum. But that just feels like not enjoying and aborbing the music for its own sake but more for some assumed status.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> I think the main similarity was in how they used small blocks to build entire movements - for eg. the 1st movements of Beethoven's 5th and Haydn's Fifths quartet (now that I notice, sort of funny how these two works have to do with 5). By the way, millionrainbows, which Op. 76 set do you prefer?


It just sound less Baroque to me, which is perhaps Mozart's failing.

I like different parts of them; I like the activity and contrasts in the finale of the Bb, and I like the fugue in the Eb.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

oskaar said:


> I just listen. I am a simple man with absolutely no theoretical musical knowledge. I dont listen to music intellectually. But I have developed a good listening ear through prog rock, jazz, classical, pop rock and world music during the last 10 years. It is about hitting a spot in me. Yestrday I discovered that Shumann did that with his orchestral music.
> And I love Haydn!


That's all that matters, is a good ear. Not having any theoretical knowledge will impede you from succinct communication with other musicians, but they're usually snobbish boors anyway. Your lack of knowledge will keep you humble, which may be an advantage in approaching music freshly. Yeah, Schumann is a real "people person," a real communicator. Too bad his life was so tragic. He sure left us some pretty music, though.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

I don't know if "WE" need a Haydn, but "I" Sonata need a Haydn


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Partita said:


> My take is that it takes many years (not just a few), and a great deal of listening, to allow time for the music of all the great composers to wash over you, not just their popular works but also delving much more deeply into their less well known output, in order to form a proper view about one's underlying appreciation of all the major composers.


This is true to an extent, but lets face it, if everyone did this for all the major composers of every era, we would only have specialists within that era, with no ability to cross compare other eras, as the time required to truly 'delve deeply' into all their lesser known works would be just too time consuming. Have you listened to Graupner's 1400 cantatas? Have you delved deeply into them? You might argue that Graupner is not a 'major' composer, but how do _you_ really know that? At a certain point individuals aren't going just by listening experiences but on opinions of 'experts'. But lets face it these kinds often disagree.



Partita said:


> As a general rule, the greater the amount of listening the more tolerant one becomes about the works of a wider range of composers. People who genuinely have a good knowledege don't usually go around slagging off any the major composers. They might express preferences but even here I haven't noticed much of that among people who are really well clued up.


I'm not sure I agree here, unless you consider many of the leading composers and musicians in the history of Western music not "well clued up". Many of which will typically trash a major composer here or there. Stravinsky on Vivaldi? Both Gould and Ravel made some pretty harsh criticisms about Beethoven, and obviously there are countless more examples of this kind of thing.



Partita said:


> And then we have the category of listener who has graduated beyond Beethoven "fan-boy" and has become, overnight almost, an expert on one or two "greats". They start making bold assertions about various other composers' alleged weaknesses in certain areas, but upon closer inspection it turns out they have about 4 CDs, and have done little more than scratch the surface, let alone allowed sufficient time to absorb any of it in a proper manner.


I'm not sure the amount of cd's owned is equal to musical knowledge. We have one of the more knowledgeable members here (PetrB) who has admitted to owning but a handful of cds. At any rate I've noticed that among those that do seem to be avid collectors, many seem to base what they purchase on what the general consensus already is as opposed to exploring different or obscure composers, so it is not surprising that after listening to all these works there opinions start to line up with this 'general consensus'.

But I do question a lot of that, particularly when I read comments like "Haydn's works just don't have that sprinkle of genius, yet he is clearly among the best composers of all time."

I agree Haydn's works don't quite have that "sprinkle of genius", so why is he considered by so many a top 5 composer? Because he was prolific? Influential? If that is the case there are a lot of other composers who have those traits too, so why is Haydn so special?


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

tdc said:


> This is true to an extent, but lets face it, if everyone did this for all the major composers of every era, we would only have specialists within that era, with no ability to cross compare other eras, as the time required to truly 'delve deeply' into all their lesser known works would be just too time consuming. Have you listened to Graupner's 1400 cantatas? Have you delved deeply into them? You might argue that Graupner is not a 'major' composer, but how do _you_ really know that? At a certain point individuals aren't going just by listening experiences but on opinions of 'experts'. But lets face it these kinds often disagree.
> 
> I'm not sure I agree here, unless you consider many of the leading composers and musicians in the history of Western music not "well clued up". Many of which will typically trash a major composer here or there. Stravinsky on Vivaldi? Both Gould and Ravel made some pretty harsh criticisms about Beethoven, and obviously there are countless more examples of this kind of thing.
> 
> ...


Haydn's works have all the genius one requires. He was special because every one of his phrases communicates with the listener and involves him/her.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I have some serious needs: food, shelter, water, monthly income and Haydn.


----------



## Guest (Mar 12, 2014)

It could be a fun little game to pick sides between these two threads.

"Well you tell the guys from the Beethoven thread that we haven't changed our minds!"


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

Whenever I listen to Haydn it better be Brahms' Variations on a Theme by!


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

What blashemy is this? I demand the exile penalty for the op!


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Whenever I listen to Haydn, it better be Beethoven. 




I'm kiddin'. Haydn's sweet.


----------



## Funny (Nov 30, 2013)

So wait, this whole thread is nothing but trolling? Are we supposed to answer indignantly or perpetuate the trolling?


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

oskaar said:


> I just listen. I am a simple man with absolutely no theoretical musical knowledge. I dont listen to music intellectually. But I have developed a good listening ear through prog rock, jazz, classical, pop rock and world music during the last 10 years. It is about hitting a spot in me. Yestrday I discovered that Shumann did that with his orchestral music.
> And I love Haydn!


Good stuff, Oskaar.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Very frustrating. I have 2 new Haydn Creations waiting for me in my mailbox; thundering and lightning!
I can't risk going out and getting them!!!


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Very frustrating. I have 2 new Haydn Creations waiting for me in my mailbox; thundering and lightning!
> I can't risk going out and getting them!!!


HMMM, How much do you really like Haydn?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> HMMM, How much do you really like Haydn?


A lot! Just got finished with the Paris Symphonies. Dying to check my mailbox, but the lightning's intense right now.
His music is a bit more masculine and rustic than Mozart. But I love Mozart too.
Different composers for different moods.

I wonder if it's raining in Linz? :lol:


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> A lot! Just got finished with the Paris Symphonies. Dying to check my mailbox, but the lightning's intense right now.
> His music is a bit more masculine and rustic than Mozart. But I love Mozart too.
> Different composers for different moods.
> 
> I wonder if it's raining in Linz? :lol:


Never :lol:....................


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> Never :lol:....................


Those Bavarian hats will protect them just in case.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

I'm a huge Haydn fan too.
My next purchase will be the Buchberger String Quartet cycle.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> I'm a huge Haydn fan too.
> My next purchase will be the Buchberger String Quartet cycle.


Good to know!

I just ordered the Opus 76 performed by the Tokyo Quartet. My mail person is probably getting really PO'd at me, frequently ordering boxed sets.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Good to know!
> 
> I just ordered the Opus 76 performed by the Tokyo Quartet. My mail person is probably getting really PO'd at me, frequently ordering boxed sets.


The Tokyo is excellent.
All their recordings are excellent.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Good to know!
> 
> I just ordered the Opus 76 performed by the Tokyo Quartet. My mail person is probably getting really PO'd at me, frequently ordering boxed sets.


So which Creation recordings did you get?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Itullian said:


> The Tokyo is excellent.
> All their recordings are excellent.


Hard to go wrong with the Tokyo in anything. Sadly, they hung up their bows last year.


----------



## Roi N (Oct 22, 2013)

This criticism shows that you never even _bothered _to listen to Haydn. How is the 95th similar to the 101st? Or the 82nd? or the 45th? How is the 'Quinten' quartet similar to 'The Joke'? Or 'The Bird'? Or any other quartet for that matter?
Haydn is one of the greatest composers that ever lived, composing a wider variety of works than anybody. His symphonic works are epic, his quartets are still the finest to ever be composed, his piano sonatas contain harmonic complexity that outreaches that of the Romantic period, his concerti show a true understanding of the instruments, and his choral works are perfectly written.
The ignorance you show isn't apropriate for these forums. I'd remove this thread if I were you.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Roi N said:


> his piano sonatas contain harmonic complexity that outreaches that of the Romantic period


Can you give any specific examples of this harmonic complexity found in his piano sonatas?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Roi N said:


> This criticism shows that you never even _bothered _to listen to Haydn. How is the 95th similar to the 101st? Or the 82nd? or the 45th? How is the 'Quinten' quartet similar to 'The Joke'? Or 'The Bird'? Or any other quartet for that matter?
> Haydn is one of the greatest composers that ever lived, composing a wider variety of works than anybody. His symphonic works are epic, his quartets are still the finest to ever be composed, his piano sonatas contain harmonic complexity that outreaches that of the Romantic period, his concerti show a true understanding of the instruments, and his choral works are perfectly written.
> The ignorance you show isn't apropriate for these forums. I'd remove this thread if I were you.


Are you speaking to me, sir? Remove this thread? Hardly! You are simply another taken in by the supposed talent of the wretched Haydn, whose endless repetition of his own works, unhindered by their melodic and inventive poverty, has bamboozled generations of listeners. It's hard to think of another composer, aside from that scoundrel Beethoven, who has been so successful in what is essentially a con game. And as the estimable Mr. Gould says of Ludwig, "A composer whose reputation is based entirely on gossip."


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Roi N said:


> This criticism shows that you never even _bothered _to listen to Haydn. How is the 95th similar to the 101st? Or the 82nd? or the 45th? How is the 'Quinten' quartet similar to 'The Joke'? Or 'The Bird'? Or any other quartet for that matter?
> Haydn is one of the greatest composers that ever lived, composing a wider variety of works than anybody. His symphonic works are epic, his quartets are still the finest to ever be composed, his piano sonatas contain harmonic complexity that outreaches that of the Romantic period, his concerti show a true understanding of the instruments, and his choral works are perfectly written.
> The ignorance you show isn't apropriate for these forums. I'd remove this thread if I were you.


Roi N, KenOC's thread on Haydn was a joke. He's actually a secretly avid Haydn enthusiast .


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

tdc said:


> Can you give any specific examples of this harmonic complexity found in his piano sonatas?


Haydn's sonatas definitely have some material which looks forward to romanticism (for eg. Adagio of Sonatas 38, 59 and 62, 1st movement of the E minor sonata that begins with an adagio, F minor variations, the C minor sonata). But Haydn's wit is often what makes them original and fun to listen to, imo.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> The Tokyo is excellent.
> All their recordings are excellent.


I also have their complete Beethoven set. Terrific!
They changed personnel; their latest recordings don't get such good reviews anymore; think they finally called it sayonara.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> So which Creation recordings did you get?


I got a period instrument performance under Martin Pearlman with Boston Baroque.
Amanda Forsythe, the soprano is quite wonderful.

I also got the first Neville Marriner, AOSMITF with Edith Mathis and Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau.
A bit slower, but excellent singing.

Played them both last night and this morning.

It's really a tremendous work and stands up to any of Mozart's vocal writing which is about as high a compliment as I can bestow.

Now I have four different performances of Haydn's The Creation.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> I also have their complete Beethoven set. Terrific!
> They changed personnel and their latest recordings don't get such good reviews anymore.


Which Beethoven, RCA?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Itullian said:


> Which Beethoven, RCA?


I have the RCA, which is quite fine (though ultimately I prefer the Takacs). I have the early LvB quartets from their more recent cycle, Harmonia Mundi I think. These are quite good also IMO. Haven't heard the later quartets from that cycle.

BTW the Tokyo have disbanded, almost a year ago.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> Which Beethoven, RCA?


Yes! The RCA set! Such a bulky box!!!


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

KenOC said:


> I have the RCA, which is quite fine (though ultimately I prefer the Takacs). I have the early LvB quartets from their more recent cycle, Harmonia Mundi I think. These are quite good also IMO. Haven't heard the later quartets from that cycle.
> 
> BTW the Tokyo have disbanded, almost a year ago.


I have the RCA set and love them. Also Brahms, Bartok.

Yes, I knew they disbanded.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Yes! The RCA set! Such a bulky box!!!


Reissued now slimline for cheap.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> Reissued now slimline for cheap.


Should have deferred my gratification??? 

Amazing the difference between bulky boxes like that and today's slimmer sets.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Itullian said:


> I have the RCA set and love them. Also Brahms, Bartok.
> 
> Yes, I knew they disbanded.


I was lucky enough to be at one of their last concerts. They were still at the top of their form, but facing two simultaneous retirements. They played a Haydn minuet (from Op. 77/1) as an encore.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Should have deferred my gratification???
> 
> Amazing the difference between bulky boxes like that and today's slimmer sets.


And it originally cost like 120 dollars!!!


----------



## lostid (Aug 13, 2012)

KenOC said:


> In honor of certain other current threads...
> 
> I mean, a composer bested only by Vivaldi in it-all-sounds-the-sameness? Wrote one symphony 106 times --- fast, slow, menuet, and fast, thank you very much. 68 pretty much identical string quartets. 62 piano sonatas. 45 piano trios and *not a decent cello part in the bunch*. And his baryton works, if stacked up, would reach to the orbit of Neptune. And back. (Note: For illustrative purposes only. Don't try this at home.)
> 
> ...


LOL, his cello concerto No.1 is easily one of the best.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> And it originally cost like 120 dollars!!!


No. I wouldn't have spent that much.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

lostid said:


> LOL, his cello concerto No.1 is easily one of the best.


The C Major cello concerto is a gem! Hard to believe it was so recently discovered!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Well I'm ecstatic. I recently purchased 2 new "The Creation"'s for the hpowders chateau and they are both glorious.
Couldn't be happier!


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Well I'm ecstatic. I recently purchased 2 new "The Creation"'s for the hpowders chateau and they are both glorious.
> Couldn't be happier!


excellent - which ones?


----------



## Guest (Mar 19, 2014)

hpowders said:


> The C Major cello concerto is a gem! Hard to believe it was so recently discovered!


Yeah, what a find! It's a great concerto. Goddam, why didn't Beethoven try one just to show his former master that he could? That's one regret I'll take to my grave.


----------



## Guest (Mar 19, 2014)

I mean, the Triple Concerto hardly comes close.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Yes! I will look in my attic. Maybe I can find a Beethoven Cello Concerto; chorale finale?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> excellent - which ones?


I bought the first Marriner from 1980 with Edith Mathis and Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau and a new period performance with Martin Pearlman leading the Boston Baroque, with unknown (to me) singers.

The Pearlman is quite a bit faster but they are both terrific.


----------



## Funny (Nov 30, 2013)

To address the "interchangeability" or "sameness" of Haydn's symphonies, I want to note that I've heard the vast majority of them and I can't think of one offhand that doesn't have an interesting motivic correspondence between two or more movements. The thing is, it's not a simple restatement of melody as we think of in a "cyclic" symphony like Franck's (though Haydn also did that, to amazing effect, in Symphony 46) but an ongoing evolution that you can pick up if you're paying attention. Haydn expected this attention and likely got it from his Esterhazy audiences. I spent the first 45 years of my life not paying attention and fell into this easy trap of writing off Haydn as doing the same thing a lot of times. Once I started paying attention I found a great amount of fascinating stuff there to delve into - and really, I've barely scratched the surface.


----------



## lostid (Aug 13, 2012)

TalkingHead said:


> I mean, the Triple Concerto hardly comes close.


Really? I don't think I can compare both pieces and determine which piece is better. Impossible for me.

Beethoven's Triple Concerto is incredibly beautiful master piece, to my ears.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

lostid said:


> LOL, his cello concerto No.1 is easily one of the best.


He was talking about cello parts within the piano trios...


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

TalkingHead said:


> Yeah, what a find! It's a great concerto. Goddam, why didn't Beethoven try one just to show his former master that he could? That's one regret I'll take to my grave.


One of Beethoven's great sins. There are others.


----------



## lostid (Aug 13, 2012)

TalkingHead said:


> Yeah, what a find! It's a great concerto. Goddam, why didn't Beethoven try one just to show his former master that he could? That's one regret I'll take to my grave.





KenOC said:


> One of Beethoven's great sins. There are others.


Why do you guys want Haydn look bad? Why not just give him the credit he deserved for producing that master cello piece?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

lostid said:


> Why do you guys want Haydn look bad? Why not just give him the credit he deserved for producing that master cello piece?


They are not trying to make Haydn look bad. They just are sorry Beethoven never wrote a solo cello concerto.
I kind of wish he wrote a clarinet concerto myself.


----------



## Roi N (Oct 22, 2013)

tdc said:


> Can you give any specific examples of this harmonic complexity found in his piano sonatas?


Sure. Take the 1st movement of his 60th (The famous C Major). Towards the end of the exposition, there are 6 bars, in which he plays through all three different diminished chords, leading the melody from G Major to C minor to A minor to G minor and finally to G Major through the dominant (D Major). The development is miraculous with its harmonic complexity.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Roi N said:


> Sure. Take the 1st movement of his 60th (The famous C Major). Towards the end of the exposition, there are 6 bars, in which he plays through all three different diminished chords, leading the melody from G Major to C minor to A minor to G minor and finally to G Major through the dominant (D Major). The development is miraculous with its harmonic complexity.


Well its a nice Piano Sonata, it certainly seems well composed, and invigorating but from a harmonic perspective it is not very interesting to me. I think we are thinking about different aspects of harmony. You are looking at the complexity of the chord changes but if you look at the way the intervals themselves are used and how dissonance is used, it is not very adventurous. Bach's harmonic language was much more complex, and interesting harmonically than what I hear in this piece.


----------



## lostid (Aug 13, 2012)

hpowders said:


> They are not trying to make Haydn look bad. They just are sorry Beethoven never wrote a solo cello concerto.
> I kind of wish he wrote a clarinet concerto myself.


I think that Triple concerto can be converted to a solo cello concerto nicely.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

lostid said:


> I think that Triple concerto can be converted to a solo cello concerto nicely.


It sure starts out with a most promising cello theme!


----------

