# Mozart Vs. Beethoven: Why choose sides?



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I might be opening a can of worms here, but it is something that has been on my mind for a while.

Why is it that people feel the need to pick sides with these two composers? I've noticed that usually when people praise Mozart, they feel the need to bash Beethoven in the process. And visa-versa, whenever someone praises Beethoven it seems as though they feel the need to bash Mozart in the process. Is it really so hard to admire both of these composers contribution to music equally?

Ya know, I actually don't think Beethoven and Mozart were all that different, just lived in different times. If Mozart had lived 20 or 30 more years, he would have been considered a "harbinger of the Romantic period" alongside Beethoven. That is my opinion anyway.


----------



## HerlockSholmes (Sep 4, 2011)

Why not choose sides? It's like a fun game. Except, instead of being a game, it becomes an inconsequential argument about two composers who have been dead for two centuries. And instead of being fun, it consists of people belligerently bashing each other's opinions. Which is, now that I think about it, very fun.
So there's your answer. It's fun.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Personally I love them both. Who is better? It probably depends upon who I am listening to at the time.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Personally I love them both. Who is better? It probably depends upon who I am listening to at the time.


Yes, I wasn't asking who is better. Just asking why people feel like they need to bash one whenever they praise the other.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Why not choose sides if you think one is truly better than the other?


----------



## graaf (Dec 12, 2009)

> I've noticed that usually when people praise Mozart, they feel the need to bash Beethoven in the process. And visa-versa, whenever someone praises Beethoven it seems as though they feel the need to bash Mozart in the process. Is it really so hard to admire both of these composers contribution to music equally?


It's false dichotomy to think that if we don't like them equaly, we have to bash one them. I don't admire their contribution to music equally, but I don't bash any of them. Maybe I'm simply not into the bashing business.


> If Mozart had lived 20 or 30 more years, he would have been considered a "harbinger of the Romantic period" alongside Beethoven. That is my opinion anyway.


The worst part of comparing composers is the what-if speculation. What if Mozart lived longer. Well, I happen to think that Mozart might stop his career as abruptly as poet Arthur Rimbaud did - he might stop composing, go to the monastery in forgotten part of Swiss mountains, and after years spent in study of theology find a lost manuscript about life of Empedocles that some Christians forgot to burn, and would be so impressed by the way Empedocles died, that he would also himself go to Mount Etna in Sicily and throw himself into a volcano. So, no "harbinger of the Romantic period alongside Beethoven" theory for me.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Most of the "bashing" opinion expressed about the music of these two, or any of the "greats", tend to be along the type: "composer X/piece X is overrated". Given the Romantic period bias TC has in general, it's not surprising Mozart tends to be the more oftenly "bashed" of the greats. I find the most consistent and balanced view of all great composers from all periods to be from our regular esteemed members of the _Opera_ forum here at TC. Maybe opera is one of those unique genres that require a discipline of listening and composition that do not lend "bashing" that easily (other than dismissing the entire genre of opera altogether).


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I agree with member graaf's comments regarding this type of "bashing" attitude being a false dichotomy. You took the words right out of my mouth!

This is what it boils down to in terms of stereotypes -

*Mozart *- Too light and fluffy. Superficial, even. Too technical. Not enough emotion. Too many tunes, not enough substance.

*Beethoven* - He got it "right" in the middle period only, either side of that he's too "easy" or too "hard." Very serious, full-on, "romantic." Expressive and emotional. The "real deal," "real" depth, drama, passion, etc.

These things can be turned around, some people like some aspects of a composer over other aspects, or like one composer over another. They're just stereotypes and cliches, nothing more.

Basically, I don't buy into building monuments, because as soon as you build them, they tend to become very unstable (eg. once you learn more). I notice that those who like to bash like to also build monuments, huge granitic edifices, sacred cows, etc. I personally have little time for either bashers or monument builders. I like Grieg's comment that his aim was to build simple houses for dwelling comfortably in, not vast Gothic churches like Bach or whoever.

Disclaimer is that I did quite a bit of spurious comparison making myself for a good while, until I found out why bother, I'd rather spend my time enjoying more and comparing less. Cut the pseudo intellectualising bullsh*t, just get into the nitty gritty of enjoying music for what it is - simply music, not ideology or dogma (that's for the churches/religions, whoever)...


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Most of the "bashing" opinion expressed about the music of these two, or any of the "greats", tend to be along the type: "composer X/piece X is overrated". Given the Romantic period bias TC has in general, it's not surprising Mozart tends to be the more oftenly "bashed" of the greats. I find the most consistent and balanced view of all great composers from all periods to be from our regular esteemed members of the _Opera_ forum here at TC. Maybe opera is one of those unique genres that require a discipline of listening and composition that do not lend "bashing" that easily (other than bashing the entire genre of opera altogether).


Interesting thought about Opera. I've been meaning to get into Opera one of these days, when I'm done buying CD's from everything else I'm interested in too haha.
I've only heard 4 Operas in full:

Elektra
Tristan Und Isolde
Wozzeck
Lulu

Pretty shameful I guess  but like I said, I want to get into it more.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

violadude said:


> Interesting thought about Opera. I've been meaning to get into Opera one of these days, when I'm done buying CD's from everything else I'm interested in too haha.
> I've only heard 4 Operas in full:
> 
> Elektra
> ...


That's a good (and unusual) start, with a strong atonal (or whatever you prefer to call it) focus. I enjoy all those four works. _Wozzeck_ for example, is obviously atonal but as I said above, opera requires a compostional discipline that does not lend havoc that easily because it deals with plots and human emotions, and I quite enjoy _Wozzeck_ indeed(*). You might come across a weak opera but even then, there's usually something about it, like a good aria or two, that makes the whole work worth listening. And it certainly takes a cultured and disciplined listening effort to sit through the whole work, which often runs for a couple of hours or more. That said, get ready some day for Mozart's great operas and of course, Beethoven's only opera.

(*) Many people I know may not enjoy atonal instrumental music, but thoroughly enjoy _Wozzeck_.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Most of the "bashing" opinion expressed about the music of these two, or any of the "greats", tend to be along the type: "composer X/piece X is overrated". Given the Romantic period bias TC has in general, it's not surprising Mozart tends to be the more oftenly "bashed" of the greats. I find the most consistent and balanced view of all great composers from all periods to be from our regular esteemed members of the _Opera_ forum here at TC. Maybe opera is one of those unique genres that require a discipline of listening and composition that do not lend "bashing" that easily (other than dismissing the entire genre of opera altogether).


Not really. Opera has a similar Verdi/Wagner divide. I estimate a fairly clean split with 50% of opera fans Wagnerites and 50% Anything-But-Wagner. The fact that this doesn't come across as much on TC is because our opera-centric members are older and more mature, and theres a certain sense of community on that forum.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> ...I find the most consistent and balanced view of all great composers from all periods to be from our regular esteemed members of the _Opera_ forum here at TC. Maybe opera is one of those unique genres that require a discipline of listening and composition that do not lend "bashing" that easily (other than dismissing the entire genre of opera altogether).


In my experience it's the same or similar with the majority of people into classical music whom I know - many of them chamber music & choral fans. I don't hear them saying say Beethoven is better than Mozart, or vice-versa. One friend does say that he finds Mozart kind of "fussy," (or "too many notes" like that famous quote) but I haven't heard him saying Mozart is rubbish or something like that. It's okay to express a preference and compare, but it has to be fair & balanced to have any real validity, imo (& also based on some experience, not just prejudging).

But I agree with the gist of what you're saying, if a listener has had more exposure in certain areas of the classical universe (eg. be it opera, symphonic, choral, chamber, etc. or whatever combinations of those), then their deeper knowledge of that/those areas will inevitably lead to them expressing more informed, commonsense & balanced opinions, not just "off the cuff" & "shooting from the hip" type of things...


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Couchie said:


> Not really. Opera has a similar Verdi/Wagner divide...


Yeah, but do Verdi lovers say Wagner is rubbish or wasn't the real deal, etc? (or vice-versa) You can tell me this, as I don't visit the opera forum on TC regularly, it is not generally my area...


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Not really. Opera has a similar Verdi/Wagner divide. I estimate a fairly clean split with 50% of opera fans Wagnerites and 50% Anything-But-Wagner. The fact that this doesn't come across as much on TC is because our opera-centric members are older and more mature, and theres a certain sense of community on that forum

I've rarely come across the Verdi/Wagner dispute... far more likely is the Wagner/Brahms divide. Beside... as Andre suggests... if there is an Verdi/Wagner dispute it rarely leads to anyone suggesting that Verdi is lightweight piffle or Wagner is overwrought crap. I am a sworn Wagnerian. _Tristan und Isolde_ is quite likely my favorite opera (unless it be one of Mozarts). If forced to decide, I would probably nominate Wagner as the single greatest composer of the Romantic era... (unless Schubert is a Romantic... in which case....?). In spite of this, I have no need to bash Verdi... and why would I? He is brilliant. I don't know how many times I have listened to or watched La Traviata and then spent days afterwards singing (badly) _Un dì, felice, eterea._..

Un dì, felice, eterea,
Mi balenaste innante,
E da quel dì tremante
Vissi d'ignoto amor.
Di quell'amor ch'è palpito
Dell'universo, Dell'universo intero,
Misterioso, altero,
Croce e delizia cor.
Misterioso, Misterioso altero,
Croce e delizia al cor.


As for Brahms... well I must have at least 50 or 60 CDs of his music so that should say enough about that divide.:lol:


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

^^I think I come across this kind of thing more commonly than bashing in terms of the people I know personally. Eg. expressing a strong preference, but not to the exclusion of everything else. Eg. I think my mother is the opposite, she likes Italian or French opera more than the German, but she likes all of them. In any case, I think that her preference is based more on lack of "staying power" than comparison of artistic quality, etc. (Wagner's operas in general being much longer than those of the others). In other words, there are a lot of factors that make us decide we like one thing over another thing. 

Even in terms of musical criticism, I don't know of any dogmatists like Hanslick vs. Wolf either side of the Brahms "conservative" vs. Bruckner "progressive" divide, I don't think this kind of polarised comparison goes on today, or at least not that much, not by the "high profile" commentators on music (not the ones I've read, anyway, & although nothing can be entirely neutral, the "us" versus "them" mentality seems to have gone out the window now, or is at least less common)...


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I'm struck by the fact that it is frequently Mozart (with perhaps Haydn in tow) who are targeted in these forums as being lightweight in comparison to Beethoven (or Brahms, or Mahler, etc...) I find it intriguing that the third member of the common triumvirate of classical music, J.S. Bach, is rarely so targeted. I suspect that there are several reasons for this. The first being that the usual criticism of Mozart... the charge of the imagined "lightweight" nature of his music and lack of depth and profundity falls flat on its face when confronting Bach. One cannot get far more "profound"... "heavy"... "tragic"... than the _St. Matthew Passion_ or _Ich habe genug_. neither is Bach likely to come off worse for the wear when speaking of the complexity of the music. One need only bring up the "Crab Canon".

Even more, however, I suspect that many who continually champion Beethoven or Brahms or Mahler (or whatever Romantic composer you wish) haven't really given a good deal of time objectively exploring music outside of the Romantic sphere. This is fine... I haven't given much effort to Chinese opera. But then I wouldn't think to offer some objective opinion concerning Chinese opera vs something else. I suspect many of them have not greatly explored Bach and the rest of the Baroque. I was quite serious a little time ago when I suggested that Handel might just be as great a composer as Beethoven... let alone Bach. The more I explore of his cantatas, oratorios, operas, etc... the more towering of a figure he appears. Yet no one challenged this opinion... perhaps as it should be. Unless you have fairly looked at the whole oeuvres of two artists in a comparison and weighed their strengths and weaknesses objectively (and not based upon the intentions of one or the other alone) such comparisons are useless and empty. Immediately I think of those who dismiss Mozart as lightweight without ever having listened to the operas or Schubert as but a pale echo of Beethoven without having given serious contemplation to the lieder and the masses. In a like manner, I suspect many of the Mozart bashers haven't listened much to the music of Mozart's time (Haydn, Weber, Gluck, etc...) yet for some reason they feel eminently qualified to dismiss his art in a manner that again we rarely see with regard to Bach.


----------



## Guest (Oct 17, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio, I too think Handel a composer of enormous stature - within a whisker of Bach, really. I was listening to Bach again this evening - some of the Harpsichord concerti transposed from violin. Superficially, one might say they "sound the same" (and I'm playing devil's advocate here). But, upon closer inspection one can hear why it is that Bach is so revered. Within each work there is an exploration of key relationships and complex counterpoint which just doesn't age. It's as if he's saying, "yes, look the keyboard - of organ/clavichord/harpsichord - is small and finite but I will show you the endless possibilities in the combinations of sequences, notes, phrases, contrapuntal voices and tones I can get from it". He is problem solving and creative all the time - but profoundly musical above all else. Not only that, he wrote "The Art of Fugue" and "The Well-Tempered Clavier" just to prove a musical point (or two)! He was criticized as being "old-fashioned", writing in a style which was already going out of date. But when Mendelssohn came along and championed Bach's music in the 19th century, bringing it to a wide audience for the first time, it's as if (notwithstanding the Romantic period in bloom) the very mechanics of music themselves were being explored and exposed for the first time. The religious music has never been equalled, IMO. Bach rightly has served as a model for all the great composers who came after, and many studied him assiduously. 

But, to return to the discussion about the merits of one composer over another... that's a horse of a different colour. Many passionate opinions will be observed in these kinds of 'rating' discussions - many of which are meaningless because of the nature of opinion itself and how subjective that process is. Still, the temptation to be drawn into this kind of discussion is often irresistible. I prefer Bach and Beethoven myself, closely followed by Handel/Brahms in equal second place. But I wouldn't necessarily listen to them much more than any other composers! I put Mozart about equal 7th on my list, alongside Tchaikowsky, (and after Prokofiev!!) these days - but it doesn't stop me absolutely loving 4 of the operas, the later symphonies (I could listen and listen and listen), some of the chamber music and the magnificent Gran Partita, which is perhaps his finest work outside the theatre. It's a revelation!!

It's important, also, to keep perspective. Josquin des Prez was considered the greatest musical genius when he was composing in the 15th century - for a long time this opinion prevailed.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

I think comparisons sometimes help me understand music better. With Mozart and Beethoven, they're two contenders for greatest of all composers - but their music represents totally different ideals, seemingly. And perhaps along this divide the argument begins.

Mozart believed that regardless how terrifying or violent music must be, it should always be beautiful. Beethoven looked for greater tension followed by resolution. Often his music sounds like he jumbled it up...then resolved the pieces beautifully. They also composed for different reasons, and so the results are very different. Mozart wrote for both connoisseurs and laypeople, music that was both complex and accessible at the one time. Beethoven seemed to write mainly for himself, which wasn't a luxury Wolfgang could afford.

So they give us different things, and I believe that this is why the arguments happens. Plus, I can listen to Mozart and gladly skip Beethoven (though not completely) and others would go the other route. We defend our view of music, rightly or wrongly. 

Wrongly, I would say, if it descends into arguments about who's better. Though of course, that's only as long as it doesn't kick off here in this thread! :devil:

:tiphat:


----------



## Guest (Oct 18, 2011)

I don't know where you got the idea Beethoven composed for himself. He had to earn a living just like everybody else and he was the first real independent composer who refused to be a servant. Take a look at Beethoven's history and you'll see plenty of commissions for his work and these have lots of do with the vigorous Viennese musical life at the time, and the rise of public concerts in larger venues and the ascendency of the virtuoso. He had made quite a bit of money by the end of his life which was bequeathed to his nephew, Karl, and he was not above "sharp practices" when it came to dealing with different publishers - pitting one against the other for the best fee. But his letters and the anecdotes of others tell of pleas for money from patrons during the course of his life because the livelihood of an 'independent' composer was precarious indeed. And he was able to do expand music in form and substance in such a way that it challenged both audiences and musicians well beyond their known experiences.

"Jumbled the music up"? I'm not sure what you meant by this. The profound "Heiliger Dankgesang" (Opus. 132 String Quartet) is a miraculous synthesis of medieval conductus and cantus firmus slowed down to unimaginably slow pace and the result is actually an exquisite hymn for 4 stringed instruments.

Also, Beethoven was a musician's composer who wrote for very talented friends and patrons - and it challenged them to such an extent that he yelled at one complaining violinist, "What do I care for your fingerings"!! And I thank Almighty God every day for those "fingerings"...!!


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

Mozart is like what you wish the world was really like

Beethoven is like what the world is really like.

If you're an optimist you may prefer Mozart

If you're a realist, you may prefer Beethoven

If you're a pessimist......


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

DavidMahler said:


> If you're a pessimist......


Going with this, there are a number of Russian Composers and 20th century composers that fit the bill.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

CountenanceAnglaise said:


> I don't know where you got the idea Beethoven composed for himself. He had to earn a living just like everybody else and he was the first real independent composer who refused to be a servant. Take a look at Beethoven's history and you'll see plenty of commissions for his work and these have lots of do with the vigorous Viennese musical life at the time, and the rise of public concerts in larger venues and the ascendency of the virtuoso. He had made quite a bit of money by the end of his life which was bequeathed to his nephew, Karl, and he was not above "sharp practices" when it came to dealing with different publishers - pitting one against the other for the best fee. But his letters and the anecdotes of others tell of pleas for money from patrons during the course of his life because the livelihood of an 'independent' composer was precarious indeed. And he was able to do expand music in form and substance in such a way that it challenged both audiences and musicians well beyond their known experiences.
> 
> "Jumbled the music up"? I'm not sure what you meant by this. The profound "Heiliger Dankgesang" (Opus. 132 String Quartet) is a miraculous synthesis of medieval conductus and cantus firmus slowed down to unimaginably slow pace and the result is actually an exquisite hymn for 4 stringed instruments.
> 
> Also, Beethoven was a musician's composer who wrote for very talented friends and patrons - and it challenged them to such an extent that he yelled at one complaining violinist, "What do I care for your fingerings"!! And I thank Almighty God every day for those "fingerings"...!!


Hey Countenance,

I was paying him a compliment! What I meant by "jumbled it about" - I know, it's a very obscure musical phrase - was that he could compose the most incredibly complex music, which then resolved itself into something more familiar. He was a genius at this level of innovation, key changes etc. He "composed for himself" to the extent that although he was fulfilling commissions, he was also composing in the first-person, as opposed to Mozart, whose personality and troubles are much more deeply submerged in the music.

Beethoven's music is explicitly about himself, more so than Mozart, is what I meant... :tiphat:


----------



## TrazomGangflow (Sep 9, 2011)

I don't know why people choose sides? I like Mozart and respect Beethoven but don't enjoy him as much but he of all composers certainly doesn't deserve bashing.


----------



## Comistra (Feb 27, 2010)

TrazomGangflow said:


> I don't know why people choose sides? I like Mozart and respect Beethoven but don't enjoy him as much but he of all composers certainly doesn't deserve bashing.


I'm perplexed by the fact that sides are even perceived to exist. There are two principal prongs, from what I see, to issues like these.

The first is people who take it personally when you do not like their favorite (or one of their favorite) composers. If you say that you do not like Mozart, many people seem to think that you're also saying that they should not like Mozart, and/or that they are wrong for liking Mozart. I do not understand this at all. The fact that I don't like Composer X should have no bearing on whether _you_ like Composer X. It doesn't vex me at all if somebody doesn't like my favorite composer. Why should it? The music is still the same.

The second is people who have determined that a particular composer is objectively great and you are wrong if you do not like him. I have yet to see anybody make a good, objective argument for the superiority of one composer over another. Generally you see comments like "if you don't see the beauty in X then there is something wrong with you," or somebody will post a youtube video of a particular piece, as if hearing it again will cause others to all of a sudden realize its profundity. It's as though tastes are not allowed to differ when it comes to classical music (except, oddly enough, when it comes to modern music: you're allowed to hate that).

Why is it so hard for some people to deal with the fact that somebody else's tastes are different than theirs? I just don't get it.


----------



## jdavid (Oct 4, 2011)

Exactly. The music of both men is a titanic part of the Austro/Germanic musical art process and it starts in something like the 12th century with a German nun/composer named Hildegard von Bingen! It drives me nuts. Beethoven's piano concerto no. 3 in c minor is often said to be modeled on Mozart's piano concerto no. 24 also in c minor and is one of Mozart's most prized works in the genre. Composers of that time and earlier, actually copied out the parts, or scores if they could find one, so that they could learn how certain aspects of the art of composition were achieved in pieces they admired. It wasn't stealing or musical plagiarism it was learning. I'm starting to lose it, but it bothers me hugely, as you can see. I need food.



violadude said:


> I might be opening a can of worms here, but it is something that has been on my mind for a while.
> 
> Why is it that people feel the need to pick sides with these two composers? I've noticed that usually when people praise Mozart, they feel the need to bash Beethoven in the process. And visa-versa, whenever someone praises Beethoven it seems as though they feel the need to bash Mozart in the process. Is it really so hard to admire both of these composers contribution to music equally?
> 
> Ya know, I actually don't think Beethoven and Mozart were all that different, just lived in different times. If Mozart had lived 20 or 30 more years, he would have been considered a "harbinger of the Romantic period" alongside Beethoven. That is my opinion anyway.


----------

