# Music of the Classical Era



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Of all the eras of music, the so-called "Classical Era"... the period of Gluck, Haydn, Mozart, and early Beethoven is perhaps the era of which I am the most ignorant. I have a good grasp of the Baroque by now. I could easily rattle off several dozen names that I consider "essential listening." I could say the same of Romanticism, Early Modernism... even late Modernism and/or music post-1950. Hell, I probably have a wider variety of composers in my collection of the Medieval and Renaissance periods. But my grasp of the Classical Era is admittedly lean pickin's beyond the big boys (Mozart, Haydn, etc...)

So here, as with the sister thread on the Baroque, I thought I'd offer up a place where we might discuss our favorite composers of the Classical era... as well as our recent discoveries or admired composers that we feel others might just be unaware of... and yet may enjoy.

Currently one Classical Era composer that I am exploring is Giovanni Paisiello. He was a composer credited with having composed nearly 100 operas... including the first setting of _Il barbiere di Siviglia_... yet now almost none of his operas are known at all. This is being slowly addressed as various ensembles turn away from yet still another recording of the same well-known piece. Currently I am listening to this:










While the work is a sacred oratorio... or rather a "passion"... it is quite operatic in nature. The music exhibits something of the delicious elegance that I have come to expect of Italian music. Indeed, in some ways I think of Handel's early Italian cantatas... albeit stripped down even further of their frills and trills and offering an even greater "transparency". The choruses are quite simple... lovely... and elegant. Surely a composer I must explore more.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Well one classical guy that (I think) we might overlook too often is Boccherini. Too many good CDs to recommend. Another is CPE Bach. And another is Cherubini, with so many great masses. Mozart and Haydn deserve their fame, but these guys should be mentioned more often.

Moving into the somewhat obscure, Clementi.

And some things I haven't explored but want to: Thomas Linley the Younger, "the English Mozart." And Dussek, who I discovered because someone in _War & Peace_ plays his sonatas.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I simply adore classical era music. I doubt there's a work I've heard from this era that I don't enjoy. Some relatively unknown composers that I love are Franz Krommer (great clarinet works), Joseph Kraus ("the Swedish Mozart"), Anton Vranitzky (some lovely symphonies), Domenico Cimarosa (opera composer who wrote some gorgeous overtures).

Here I'd like to champion Christian Cannabich who wrote over 70 symphonies and was the director of the famous Mannheim Orchestra. Here is his 63rd symphony:





I have the two Naxos recording of his late symphonies:


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

CPE Bach is the king. Boccherini is my second favorite. Haydn and Mozart write more professionally but I don't find their works as interesting. If I want a thrill, CPE Bach and Boccherini are my composers.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Michael Haydn, all too often overshadowed by Joseph.

Mozart must have surely, surely, surely, surely studied this piece by Michael Haydn. Listen and decide for yourself.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Johann Ladislaus Dussek (1760-1812), piano concerto.

I have the CD.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

I guess I'm more into galante than the later stuff. Mozart and Haydn sound like the more mature Classical/Early Romantic with their later works. I think CPE Bach and Boccherini were more galante or were the best in galante imo. Locatelli and Carl Stamitz were sort of in the middle between periods as well. And Franz Xaver Pokorny has a great Flute Concerto originally thought was from Boccherini. So yeah the Classical Era doesn't just sound like Mozart and Haydn.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

neoshredder said:


> Franz Xaver Pokorny


That is a good mention. I've liked everything I've heard by him. I'll look for the flute concerto.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

I love Classical Era music, but between Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven I find it an almost overwhelming task to take it all in. I am particularly into Haydn ATM. I love his first cello concerto, masses and string quartets. I am not fully into his symphonies yet (I got all 104 of them for a great price) but will be listening to a large portion of them over the next few months. 

Beethoven I have listened to a great deal and he is a firm favourite. I can't fault Mozart, but I haven't got into his full oeuvre yet. The Requiem, his Great Mass, clarinet concerto, some symphonies and a selection of piano concerti as well as The Magic Flute. I intend to get more of his operas next.

Loving the recommendations in this thread so far, BTW. 

I have a couple of discs of Cherubini and Clementi, but none of Boccherini's or the later Bachs ATM.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

"Classical" era music is overall my favourite style of music, marginally ahead of baroque, and then followed by the early/mid romantic period. I have virtually everything written by all the best-known classical era composers (Haydn, Mozart, Beethove, Schubert). It was among these composers that I first concentrated attention for several years. 

After a while, mainly prompted by material I had heard on the radio, I began to acquire a collection of several other classical composers' works. It has now built up to quite a sizeable collection of some 20 other composers. The biggest colections are for Sammartini, Michael Haydn, Myslivecek, Stamitz, Kuhlau, Cherubini, Cimarosa, Hummel, Boccherini, Vanhal, Dittersdorf.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Michael Haydn, all too often overshadowed by Joseph.
> 
> Mozart must have surely, surely, surely, surely studied this piece by Michael Haydn. Listen and decide for yourself.


Yes. This is indeed a beautiful work. I picked up the disc a couple of years back and was quite impressed with how good Joseph's brother could be. This is one of the reasons I couldn't understand the repeated -3 votes for Michael Haydn on the "Greatest Composers" thread... and one of the reasons I started these threads: to present the works of composers beyond the so-called "core repertoire" who are far more than just a footnote.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Right now I'm listening to Boccherini's _Stabat Mater_ on Spotify. It is an exquisite piece... scored originally for string quintet and soloist it is a lovely intimate take on what is commonly a choral work for much larger forces.


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

ANTON REICHA - father of the wind quintet and lifelong friend of Beethoven. Wrote lots of music but most famous for his 24 wind quintets.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Johann Ladislaus Dussek (1760-1812), piano concerto.


Lovely work. I also love his concerto for two pianos (Interesting spelling of his name in this video).


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

mmsbls said:


> I simply adore classical era music. I doubt there's a work I've heard from this era that I don't enjoy.
> 
> Really? Try this: (Salieri piano concerto)


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

stomanek said:


> Really? Try this: (Salieri piano concerto)


I'm not sure I would ever purchase a Salieri work, but I certainly enjoyed that movement of his piano concerto. Some parts were quite nice. Obviously I don't like all Classical era music equally, but as I said, I do not think I've heard anything from the era that I didn't like somewhat.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Early Schubert and late Mozart is just astounding...

Here's a handy infographic about the timeline of Classical era composers. It ends with Schubert.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

I'm not crazy about Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart outside a few pieces and genres, and I'm not crazy about the classical period in general, but there are a few composers I have enjoyed from that period. I LOVE the work of Franz Joseph Haydn, so much personality and energy. I also rather enjoy what I've heard by Antonio Salieri and Leopold Mozart, and there's obscure gems like Francesco Zappa (I believe the only recording of any of his music that exists are arrangements that Frank Zappa created on his Synclavier). Also, Ludwig van Beethoven and Franz Schubert aren't classical  Sorry to break it to anybody who thinks they are, but they're Romantics. Beethoven does bridge the line between Classical and Romantic, but he really is a Romantic, and Felix Mendelssohn sounds more classical than either of them.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> Also, Ludwig van Beethoven and Franz Schubert aren't classical  Sorry to break it to anybody who thinks they are, but they're Romantics. Beethoven does bridge the line between Classical and Romantic, but he really is a Romantic, and Felix Mendelssohn sounds more classical than either of them.


Schubert is a transitional composer between the Classical and Romantic era. His early works (with the exception of his Lieder, which is the one of the earliest products of Romantic era of music) are Classical especially his first 5 symphonies and the Trout Quintet. It is only with his composing of the Unfinished symphony in 1822 that his Romantic side become more pronounced. But here's the catch: the Octet in F written in 1824 is classical in nature, while the last three quartets written between 1824-1825 is undeniably Romantic. The Great C major symphony was described by musicologists as the last great Classical symphony and one of the first Romantic symphony that influenced Schumann, Brahms, Mahler and Bruckner.

So, we can safely conclude that: Schubert is the *last* of the great Classical composers and the *first* (together with LvB) great Early Romantics.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Schubert is not classical. Neither is Beethoven or most of Mozart's late output.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

neoshredder said:


> Schubert is not classical. Neither is Beethoven or most of Mozart's late output.


Wikipedia begs to disagree..



> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Classical_era_composers


Lists of classical music
composers by era
Medieval (476-1400)
Renaissance (1400-1600)
Baroque (1600-1760)
Classical era (1730-1820)
Romantic era (1815-1910)
20th century (1900-2000)
21st century (since 2000)

This is a list of composers of the Classical music era, roughly from 1730 to 1820. Prominent composers of the Classical era include Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann Stamitz, Joseph Haydn, Johann Christian Bach, Antonio Salieri, Muzio Clementi, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Luigi Boccherini. *Prominent composers of both the Classical and early Romantic eras include Ludwig van Beethoven and Franz Schubert.*


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Mozart is most certainly Classical... Indeed he is the epitome of the Classical era. Beethoven is a transitional figure. He bridges the Classical era into Romanticism. His earlier works are clearly "Classical" while later works point the way toward Romanticism... but retain a "Classical" attention to clarity of form or structure. One need only compare the clarity of structure in Beethoven to the High-Romanticism of Wagner, Berlioz, or Mahler. Schubert is also a transitional figure... arguably further leaning toward Romanticism. 

The reality is that there are no clear cut-off dates for artistic styles. One cannot cite the date upon which the Renaissance began or ended.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Mozart had 2 or 3 distinct periods. I would say there is a considerable difference in Mozart's last 4 Symphonies. Sounds like Romantacism to me. His early Symphonies sound like Rococo. His middle Symphonies are the typical Symphonies of the Classical Era. Once I started hearing the anger or expressions of Mozart's come out, I'm thinking that is the beginning of the Romantic Era. Symphony 38 comes to mind. Not sure if that is the first Symphony to sound like that.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

mmsbls said:


> I'm not sure I would ever purchase a Salieri work, but I certainly enjoyed that movement of his piano concerto. Some parts were quite nice. Obviously I don't like all Classical era music equally, but as I said, I do not think I've heard anything from the era that I didn't like somewhat.


If you like that Salieri movement - I can understand why you say you like all classical music.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

neoshredder said:


> Mozart had 2 or 3 distinct periods. I would say there is a considerable difference in Mozart's last 4 Symphonies. Sounds like Romantacism to me. His early Symphonies sound like Rococo. His middle Symphonies are the typical Symphonies of the Classical Era. Once I started hearing the anger or expressions of Mozart's come out, I'm thinking that is the beginning of the Romantic Era. Symphony 38 comes to mind. Not sure if that is the first Symphony to sound like that.


I think it is. My wife doesn't like Mozart music - thinks he's just a light and fluffy choccie box composer. Never heard no 38 though and I popped it in the car CD once and she asked which Beethoven sy is that.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

BurningDesire said:


> Also, Ludwig van Beethoven and Franz Schubert aren't classical  Sorry to break it to anybody who thinks they are, but they're Romantics. Beethoven does bridge the line between Classical and Romantic, but he really is a Romantic, and Felix Mendelssohn sounds more classical than either of them.


Can you please clarify your understanding of the main differences between "classical" and "romantic" music , and then state why you consider Beethoven and Schubert are mainly "romantic" composers against each of those differences.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

neoshredder said:


> Schubert is not classical. Neither is Beethoven or most of Mozart's late output.


First time I've seen anyone claim that Mozart is not "classical".

In what ways did late Mozart break with the classical mould? Take any example you like and say why it's "romantic", not "classical".


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

I didn't say Mozart wasn't Classical. I said the late Mozart sounds more Romantic. The key word is late. When he starts sounding like Beethoven gives me the clue that it sounds Romantic.


----------



## MaestroViolinist (May 22, 2012)

stomanek said:


> mmsbls said:
> 
> 
> > I simply adore classical era music. I doubt there's a work I've heard from this era that I don't enjoy.
> ...


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Soler is great, Salieri is great, CPE Bach is AWESOME, Giuliani is cool.


----------



## MaestroViolinist (May 22, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Soler is great, Salieri is great, CPE Bach is AWESOME, Giuliani is cool.


And Mozart is the BEST! Sorry, just had to say that. ut:


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

MaestroViolinist said:


> And Mozart is the BEST! Sorry, just had to say that. ut:


Your opinion is *WRONG.*


----------



## MaestroViolinist (May 22, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Your opinion is *WRONG.*


*Sniff* That is a _matter of opinion_. And mine is that I'm right, and that Mozart is the best, and that you are... Wait for it... *WRONG.*

:devil:


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

MaestroViolinist said:


> And Mozart is the BEST! Sorry, just had to say that. ut:


CPE Bach is the best.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

MaestroViolinist said:


> *Sniff* That is a _matter of opinion_. And mine is that I'm right, and that Mozart is the best, and that you are... Wait for it... *WRONG.*
> 
> :devil:


I know it's a matter of opinion. My opinion is right and yours is *WRONG.*


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I know it's a matter of opinion. My opinion is right and yours is *WRONG.*


And my opinion is this version of the opinion is right. Mozart is not the best.


----------



## MaestroViolinist (May 22, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I know it's a matter of opinion. My opinion is right and yours is *WRONG.*


This could go on all night, I'll let you win *this* time.

And I'll ignore neoshredder *glares*.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Most Mozart doesn't seem to have that certain dramatic power that CPE Bach has. Works like Don Giovanni almost get there, but isn't quite at the level of CPE's symphonies. Mozart was a brilliant contrapuntalist and very good operatic, vocal and choral composer, but a lot of his instrumental works are extremely overrated.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> My opinion is *WRONG.*


This is why message boards let us edit each other's quotes.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

neoshredder said:


> I didn't say Mozart wasn't Classical. I said the late Mozart sounds more Romantic. The key word is late. When he starts sounding like Beethoven gives me the clue that it sounds Romantic.


Yes I know what you said, which is why I asked you: _"In what ways did *late Mozart* break with the classical mould? Take any example you like and say why it's "romantic", not "classical"._


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Mozart was a brilliant contrapuntalist and very good operatic, vocal and choral composer, but a lot of his instrumental works are extremely overrated.


What's over-rated about his last 3 Symphonies, last 7 Piano Concertos, Clarinet Concerto, various Serenades (eg Nos 10, 13), Sinfonia Concertante, "Haydn" String Quartets, String and Wind Quintets?

I assume you have actually heard all of these works. In that case do tell us where you think Mozart slipped up in his writing of say the Jupiter Symphony, or perhaps his Piano Concerto No 20. Why exactly do think they're over-rated?


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Very Senior Member said:


> What's over-rated about his last 3 Symphonies, last 7 Piano Concertos, Clarinet Concerto, various Serenades (eg Nos 10, 13), Sinfonia Concertante, "Haydn" String Quartets, String and Wind Quintets?
> 
> I assume you have actually heard all of these works. In that case do tell us where you think Mozart slipped up in his writing of say the Jupiter Symphony, or perhaps his Piano Concerto No 20. Why exactly do think they're over-rated?


Well I've heard almost all of those works and I wouldn't say that the instrumental and orchestral works from the last decade of his life are that overrated, but almost all of his divertimenti, symphonies, sonatas, violin concerti and other works written before the 1780s lack the genius that you see in his 41st symphony, 20th piano concerto etc. Even in his later works I think his music, however technically brilliant it might be, is missing the quirkiness of Haydn and CPE Bach that I believe to be what really made the classical era music sparkle against the later styles from the 19th century.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well I've heard almost all of those works and I wouldn't say that the instrumental and orchestral works from the last decade of his life are that overrated, but almost all of his divertimenti, symphonies, sonatas, violin concerti and other works written before the 1780s lack the genius that you see in his 41st symphony, 20th piano concerto etc. Even in his later works I think his music, however technically brilliant it might be, is missing the quirkiness of Haydn and CPE Bach that I believe to be what really made the classical era music sparkle against the later styles from the 19th century.


Good quality works all written before the 1780s:

Symphonies 25-33

Piano Concertos No 1-9 (No 9 "Jeunehomme" is a very famous work)

Violin Concertos 1-6 (mostly excellent)

Wind Concertos: flute, flute & harp, oboe, bassoon (good to excellent)

Sinfonia Concertante, K 297 b (excellent)

Piano sonatas, 1-13 (some excellent eg No 11)

Violin sonatas, several very good eg K 304 and K 305

Flute & String Quartets, several very good ones especially K 298

Serenades, especially good ones being Nos 6, 7, 8

Divertimenti, most of his output was written before 1780, including some very good ones

Masses, several especially the "Coronation Mass"

Church Sonatas, several mostly very good

Opera, several including Zaide

Concert arias, many very nice ones


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Very Senior Member said:


> Good quality works all written before the 1780s:
> 
> Symphonies 25-33
> 
> ...


Compare Mozart's 25th symphony with CPE's Hamburg Symphony no. 1 and you'll wonder why Mozart got to be so famous:






Mozart 25 is just a lame effort at Sturm und Drang. CPE Bach's symphonies just seem to spark with energy and give a real meaning to the classical era Sturm und Drang compared to Mozart's fluffy 25th to 33rd. How much non-Mozart, non-Haydn classical are you familiar with by the way? Also, Mozart's divertimenti? You really think they're all magnificent? To me they're all the same kind of light easy music with little aesthetic value compared to the hardcore Sturm und Drang that was in fashion at the time.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Mozart 25 is just a lame effort at Sturm und Drang. CPE Bach's symphonies just seem to spark with energy and give a real meaning to the classical era Sturm und Drang compared to Mozart's fluffy 25th to 33rd.


Pull the other one. Mozart's 25th is a superb work. It was No 49 on the TC list of top recommended symphonies, well ahead of any of Haydn's.

I don't quite know how to break this news to you but as regards the symphonies C P E Bach they got absolutely nowhere in this list, and in fact I've never seen any of his symphonies listed in any list of top buys on any forum I've ever been involved in. I'm not suggesting they're poor in any way, but they sure aren't in the limelight and never have been.



> How much non-Mozart, non-Haydn classical are you familiar with by the way?


Thank you for asking. I manage to get by. I'm not saying any more in case the FBI catch up with me. I feel as if they're on my tail all the time and just waiting for one tiny slip-up.



> Also, Mozart's divertimenti? You really think they're all magnificent? To me they're all the same kind of light easy music with little aesthetic value compared to the hardcore Sturm und Drang that was in fashion at the time.


OK, point taken that Mozart didn't write much Sturm und Drang. But that was largely because this style/movement was mainly over by the time Mozart got into his stride. Haydn was the big cheese in this area, writing his S&D symphonies in the late 1760s and early 1770's. Mozart was obviously still only a lad at that age. Besides, as he entered into the employment of the Archbishop Mozart could only write what he was asked for at this time, and I guess he didn't get that many commissions for S&D symphonies. They don't tend to sound too good in the R.C. liturgy.

If you look again at the TC Recommended Symphony results I referred to above, Haydn didn't seem to achieve much by way of fame from any of his S&D symphonies, as none of these symphonies is listed in the top 150. I fully accept that the TC list is by no means definitive, but all the same it was Haydn's much later symphonies that command the main respect.

As for Mozart's divertimenti, yes I find many of them to be exquisitely delightful, far better than anything similar from other composers of this era. I often prefer the simpler things in life, as long as they're good quality.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Very Senior Member said:


> Yes I know what you said, which is why I asked you: _"In what ways did *late Mozart* break with the classical mould? Take any example you like and say why it's "romantic", not "classical"._


I told you. When he starts sounding like Beethoven, that is breaking away from the Classical Mould. Beethoven=Early Romanticism. How else do I need to expliain it?


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

neoshredder said:


> I told you. When he starts sounding like Beethoven, that is breaking away from the Classical Mould. Beethoven=Early Romanticism. How else do I need to expliain it?


But Beethoven is still considered a classical era composer! Together with Haydn, they were considered the ''First Viennese School".

*The First Viennese School is a name mostly used to refer to three composers of the Classical period in Western art music in late-18th-century Vienna: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Joseph Haydn and Ludwig van Beethoven. Franz Schubert is occasionally added to the list.

German musical literature refers to the grouping as the "Wiener Schule" or "Neue Wiener Schule". The existence of a "First Viennese School" is debatable. The term is often assumed to connote the great Vienna-based masters of the Classical style working in the late 18th and early 19th century, particularly Joseph Haydn, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Ludwig van Beethoven and Franz Schubert. *

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

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


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

neoshredder said:


> I told you. When he starts sounding like Beethoven, that is breaking away from the Classical Mould. Beethoven=Early Romanticism. How else do I need to expliain it?


Beethoven didn't write anything remotely "Romantic" until the Eroica and that was written in 1804. Mozart died in 1791. If you think that late Mozart sounds like the romantic element of Beethoven then presumably you believe that it is Mozart who is the true founder of the Romantic era in music. That would be quite an incredible claim to make on behalf of Mozart, which I suspect would command little if any support among experts.

The main doubt is whether Beethoven is primarily Classical or Romantic, not whether Mozart preceded him in this development by some 12-13 year earlier. Most people accept Mozart as being quintessentially a Classical composer, and nothing else. Personally, I don't think that Beethoven was a Romantic. He generally stuck quite rigidly to Classical forms, except very late in life when he wandered off into unknown territory. Schubert definitely was a quasi Romantic if only by virtue of his lieder, but his orchestral and instrumental works were largely Classical, until the very last ones.

To suggest that Mozart had Romantic traits among his late works is pushing things way too far. One could equally argue that Haydn too had similar traits in his late works. But it would be wrong because Romanticism and Classicism in music are distinguished by mainly by form and structure, and secondly by whether or not there is intended to be any poetic expression in the music (e,g. a la Schumann and Chopin, et seq). There isn't such expression in the music of Mozart and Haydn, except possbly by way of exception here and there, as they were both consciously writing absolute music and nothing else. You may be aware that when Haydn first heard the Eroica he was amazed at the audacity of the young Beethoven's work, as he had heard nothing like it before, and that included all that he had heard by Mozart.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Most of Beethoven's music is very moody. Since when did moodiness become a part of the fluffy Classical Era? Beethoven breaks the tradition of easy listening that is the Classical Era. I don't see him as a Classical Era Composer. The same with late Mozart stuff like Symphonies 38-41


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> Most of Beethoven's music is very moody. Since when did moodiness become a part of the fluffy Classical Era? Beethoven breaks the tradition of easy listening that is the Classical Era. I don't see him as a Classical Era Composer. The same with late Mozart stuff like Symphonies 38-41


It became part of the classical era in Sturm und Drang.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

neoshredder said:


> Most of Beethoven's music is very moody. Since when did moodiness become a part of the fluffy Classical Era? Beethoven breaks the tradition of easy listening that is the Classical Era. I don't see him as a Classical Era Composer. The same with late Mozart stuff like Symphonies 38-41


Beethoven's "moody" music as you call it can easily be incorporated into the Classical mould. The difference between Classical and Romantic music is mainly a matter of structure and form, not the degree of moodiness. Charles Rosen the musicologist wrote a famous book in this subject "The Classical Style" and concluded that decisively that Beethoven remained a Classicist.

The Classical style evolved over quite a long period. It was already under way before the death of J S Bach and Handel. It incorporated Sturm und Drang, and other types of dark music, e.g. Mozart's Masonic music.. It wasn't just about prim and proper, dainty music. The Classical era clearly didn't finish with Mozart. Haydn continued writing long after Mozart's death. Beethoven continued with it, but shaped it further along more dramatic lines. Likewise, Mozart didn't pre-shadow Romanticsm merely because some his music may sound "moody".

The Classical style began to fizzle before the death of Beethoven. There was a growing demand from the concert-going public even before Beethoven's death was for a different style of music, and hence the enormous popularity of theatre works by the likes of Rossini and Weber, to some extent eclipsing the great Beethoven even before he died. Schubert tried to emulate the lead of Rossini and Weber but was not largely successful due to choice of poor librettists.

Other roots of Romanticism lay in the growing interest in various new forms of music (tone poems, song cycles etc), a greater interest in melody rather than harmony and form, and very importantly the use of music as a vehicle for the delivery of poetry (Schumman). Interest in the music of Mozart and Haydn etc at this tiime sagged badly. Beethoven wasn't strongly motivated by any these developments, except on a piecemeal and occasional basis (e.g. the 6th Symphony). What he did he did because he wanted to not because he wasw following any new fashions. His one and venture into opera was long and drawn out and caused him a lot of grief. The Romantic era began to flourish after the deaths of Beethoven and Schubert, partly because there was no one in the same league to carry on the tradition and partly because the demands of the public had changed.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Very Senior Member said:


> Can you please clarify your understanding of the main differences between "classical" and "romantic" music , and then state why you consider Beethoven and Schubert are mainly "romantic" composers against each of those differences.


to me, classical style refers to very strict adherence to forms, typically thin harmony, and the use of common tropes (certain ornamentations, orchestration choices), whereas romantic style is the expansion and evolution of those forms into works of extreme length and extreme brevity, greater expansion in chromatic harmony with much thicker, richer chords, heavier orchestration. Beethoven used classical forms, but he stretched them in many ways that you don't really see in a typical classical piece. His harmonies while not quite as adventurous as say, Chopin, are still far richer than those of Mozart or even his teacher Haydn, even in many of his early works such as the Pathetique Sonata, Op. 13. I admit I am far more well-versed in Beethoven than I am in Schubert, but both in his piano pieces as well as his lieder he uses very romantic harmonies and melodies. These things share more in common with Chopin and Robert Schumann than they do with Mozart. Just because they still used classical forms doesn't mean they were classical artists, just like we wouldn't call Brahms a classical composer because he was used those forms fairly strictly.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

BurningDesire said:


> to me, classical style refers to very strict adherence to forms, typically thin harmony, and the use of common tropes (certain ornamentations, orchestration choices), whereas romantic style is the expansion and evolution of those forms into works of extreme length and extreme brevity, greater expansion in chromatic harmony with much thicker, richer chords, heavier orchestration. Beethoven used classical forms, but he stretched them in many ways that you don't really see in a typical classical piece. His harmonies while not quite as adventurous as say, Chopin, are still far richer than those of Mozart or even his teacher Haydn, even in many of his early works such as the Pathetique Sonata, Op. 13. I admit I am far more well-versed in Beethoven than I am in Schubert, but both in his piano pieces as well as his lieder he uses very romantic harmonies and melodies. These things share more in common with Chopin and Robert Schumann than they do with Mozart. Just because they still used classical forms doesn't mean they were classical artists, just like we wouldn't call Brahms a classical composer because he was used those forms fairly strictly.


If you haven't already done so please refer to my post above yours, and see in particular the reference to Charles Rosen's book where these issues are thoroughly looked at, and from which he concludes that Beethoven remained a Classical composer whilst clearly pushing the style into new and exciting directions, e.g. in terms of length and drama.

Schubert on the other hand was far more a pioneer into Romanticism by virtue of his lieder, in which for the first time the songs were about how people felt about their enviroment etc. All the same, most of Schubert's early mid orchestral music and instrumental music followed standard Classical lines. Closer to the end of his time he began to incorporate more Romantic imagery, yet greater exploration of modal variations, and extending the development sections to give his music further opportunity to express his sense for harmonic color and contrasts, thus sounding more Romantic than Classical. Schubert was truly a more transitional Classical/Romantic composer.

Again, I have no wish to argue this further.


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

Adding my hearty 'yeas' to Science's mention of Boccherini, CPE Bach, and Cherubini. I would add Jean Baptiste Vanhal 1739-1813 - I have four volumes of his symphonies, several in his 'Sturm und Drang' style, and I enjoy them immensely. Additionally, his catalogue of works include:

_100 quartets, at least 73 symphonies, 95 sacred works, and a large number of instrumental and vocal works. The symphonies, in particular, have been committed increasingly often to compact disc in recent times, and the best of them are comparable with many of Haydn's. Many of Vanhal's symphonies are in minor keys and are considered highly influential to the "Sturm und Drang" movement of his time._ wikipedia entry



science said:


> Well one classical guy that (I think) we might overlook too often is Boccherini. Too many good CDs to recommend. Another is CPE Bach. And another is Cherubini, with so many great masses. Mozart and Haydn deserve their fame, but these guys should be mentioned more often.
> 
> Moving into the somewhat obscure, Clementi.
> 
> And some things I haven't explored but want to: Thomas Linley the Younger, "the English Mozart." And Dussek, who I discovered because someone in _War & Peace_ plays his sonatas.


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

This part of your full quote below,

_His [Beethoven] harmonies while not quite as adventurous as say, Chopin, are still far richer than those of Mozart or even his teacher Haydn, even in many of his early works such as the Pathetique Sonata, Op. 13._,

I'm not quite in agreement with, though I may have misunderstood your meaning. Beethoven had no more chord types than J.S. Bach, though by Beethoven's day the Augmented Sixth Chords were being used more and more often, still, Bach would and did use them in their pre-dominant character. If you are speaking of his sudden or distant modulations, and use of a Circle of 3rds (growing chromaticism), then I do agree.



BurningDesire said:


> to me, classical style refers to very strict adherence to forms, typically thin harmony, and the use of common tropes (certain ornamentations, orchestration choices), whereas romantic style is the expansion and evolution of those forms into works of extreme length and extreme brevity, greater expansion in chromatic harmony with much thicker, richer chords, heavier orchestration. Beethoven used classical forms, but he stretched them in many ways that you don't really see in a typical classical piece. His harmonies while not quite as adventurous as say, Chopin, are still far richer than those of Mozart or even his teacher Haydn, even in many of his early works such as the Pathetique Sonata, Op. 13. I admit I am far more well-versed in Beethoven than I am in Schubert, but both in his piano pieces as well as his lieder he uses very romantic harmonies and melodies. These things share more in common with Chopin and Robert Schumann than they do with Mozart. Just because they still used classical forms doesn't mean they were classical artists, just like we wouldn't call Brahms a classical composer because he was used those forms fairly strictly.


----------



## Praeludium (Oct 9, 2011)

But there are all those cool modulation in tonality far apart the original one (which are less present (albeit present, particularly in the late works) in Haydn's and Mozart's opus).

edit : Since we're at it, is there any composer who wrote great piano sonatas apart from Haydn and Mozart ? 
I heard come cool one by Clementi and Dussek, but they're definitely not at the same level as the Mozart/Haydn/Beethoven sonatas. Dussek sounded a bit heavy (but I just listened to a few of his works). I'm seeking for daring and audacious music. Thanks


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

_since when did moodiness become a part of the fluffy <sic> Classical era?_ (end partial quote)

...since the harmony in the works of Beethoven is thoroughly classical.

Also: Romanticism is not defined by 'moodiness' - the 40th Symphony of Mozart is moody, and the Kyrie from Bach's Mass in B minor is moody, to name only two works. The music of the 18th century (and any century) may include some fluff, but I don't think anyone would call Haydn's Oratorio _The Creation_ fluffy, nor his quartets Op. 20.



neoshredder said:


> Most of Beethoven's music is very moody. Since when did moodiness become a part of the fluffy Classical Era? Beethoven breaks the tradition of easy listening that is the Classical Era. I don't see him as a Classical Era Composer. The same with late Mozart stuff like Symphonies 38-41


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> I told you. When he starts sounding like Beethoven, that is breaking away from the Classical Mould. Beethoven=Early Romanticism. How else do I need to expliain it?


Better than that.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

neoshredder said:


> Schubert is not classical. Neither is Beethoven or most of Mozart's late output.


Well, you're correct one out of three. Schubert is early romantic, yes, very marked with classicism. Mozart, and Beethoven, regardless of arbitrary date, while heeding forms and procedures, remain classical from beginning to each of their bitter ends.

The Tendencies and influences, the directions of each, is where many a general music history / music appreciation textbook will wrongly run away with it, leading so many to misunderstand the facts of form and harmonic procedures characteristic of a composer or an era, and can lead one to 'pronounce' any part of Beethoven or Mozart as 'not classical.' Bah.

Schubert is the earliest of romantics, still 'sounding' strongly of classicism.

Not that any of us are writing a thesis for a grade here, but adding to an already unnecessary long-standing confusion kind of vexes. The arbitrariness of after the fact early musicologists slapping names and date on musical eras leaves so much untidy - composers living over the timeline demarcations, which are 'arbitrary' to a degree, and do not neatly end or begin an era, people tending to ignore those things when they were born, and when they die


----------



## Toddlertoddy (Sep 17, 2011)

PetrB said:


> Not that any of us are writing a thesis for a grade here, but adding to an already unnecessary long-standing confusion kind of vexes. The arbitrariness of after the fact early musicologists slapping names and date on musical eras leaves so much untidy - composers living over the timeline demarcations, which are 'arbitrary' to a degree, and do not neatly end or begin an era, people tending to ignore those things when they were born, and when they die


I think the problem comes from the fact that music has smooth transitions from one "era" to the next, so we can't actually distinguish Beethoven's almost-romantic from Beethoven's classical.

Of course they're arbitrary, all dates are. We could be living in the year 1369495698 AD or -30967 AD.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Most of Beethoven's music is very moody. Since when did moodiness become a part of the fluffy Classical Era? Beethoven breaks the tradition of easy listening that is the Classical Era. I don't see him as a Classical Era Composer.

So composing in a minor key is all we need to move from Classicism to Romanticism?


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Most of Beethoven's music is very moody. Since when did moodiness become a part of the fluffy Classical Era? Beethoven breaks the tradition of easy listening that is the Classical Era. I don't see him as a Classical Era Composer.
> 
> So composing in a minor key is all we need to move from Classicism to Romanticism?


Uh pounding the piano and playing loud are usually signs of Romanticism. Yes theoretically Beethoven is Classical but from a listening standpoint, Beethoven has more in common with the sound of Mendelssohn and many others of the early Romantic than how the sound of most of the Classical era. But if form is the only way to characterize Beethoven, I guess he is Classical. Quite different from any other Classical composers sound though. Maybe we can call it the Beethovenian Era. A fusion of Classical form with common dynamics and length of Romantic pieces.


----------



## Toddlertoddy (Sep 17, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> Uh *pounding the piano and playing loud are usually signs of Romanticism*. Yes theoretically Beethoven is Classical but from a listening standpoint, Beethoven has more in common with the sound of Mendelssohn and many others of the early Romantic than how the sound of most of the Classical era. But if form is the only way to characterize Beethoven, I guess he is Classical. Quite different from any other Classical composers sound though. Maybe we can call it the Beethovenian Era. A fusion of Classical form with common dynamics and length of Romantic pieces.







Bach is now romantic. (At least the beginning is)


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

I'm sure there is mix Romanticism in all eras. Maybe Bach wasn't too popular as he was ahead of his time.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> Uh pounding the piano and playing loud are usually signs of Romanticism. Yes theoretically Beethoven is Classical but from a listening standpoint, Beethoven has more in common with the sound of Mendelssohn and many others of the early Romantic than how the sound of most of the Classical era. But if form is the only way to characterize Beethoven, I guess he is Classical. Quite different from any other Classical composers sound though. Maybe we can call it the Beethovenian Era. A fusion of Classical form with common dynamics and length of Romantic pieces.


Beethoven was fusion. Like jazz/rock.


----------



## MaestroViolinist (May 22, 2012)

Very interesting, this "*Classical Era*" thread has turned into a discussion of *Beethoven* (^and jazz and rock obviously). 

To get this thread back on track I thought I might mention a woman composer called Anna Amalia (a princess of somewhere or other). Here is something I found on YouTube: 



 Quite listenable.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Mozart is a Romantic:






and H.I.F. Biber was a Modernist ahead of Schoenberg:






(wait for the second mvt.)

:lol:


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Toddlertoddy said:


> I think the problem comes from the fact that music has smooth transitions from one "era" to the next, so we can't actually distinguish Beethoven's almost-romantic from Beethoven's classical.
> 
> Of course they're arbitrary, all dates are. We could be living in the year 1369495698 AD or -30967 AD.


You said, quite rightly 'ALMOST ROMANTIC.' The envelope within which Beethoven worked was pushed to the extreme, stretched, tattered and torn - but that envelope was that of classicism, both forms and harmonic procedures. He made 'a sound' - and gestures, which very much inspired the romantic composers who came later, but was never, in any stage, a 'romantic.'

Adding to the historic anomaly heap, Carl Maria von Weber was - by his birth-death dates - an almost exact contemporary of Beethoven, but wrote, from the get-go, music which is romantic in style, form and procedures - the first truly 'romantic' composer. It seems textbooks are dumbed-down to give a nutshell overview, and that is where the 'anomalies' are overlooked: in trying to do a large, global but cursory job of explaining hundreds of years of musical development and progress, some Big Mistakes are set into print.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

PetrB said:


> You said, quite rightly 'ALMOST ROMANTIC.' The envelope within which Beethoven worked was pushed to the extreme, stretched, tattered and torn - but that envelope was that of classicism, both forms and harmonic procedures. He made 'a sound' - and gestures, which very much inspired the romantic composers who came later, but was never, in any stage, a 'romantic.'
> 
> Adding to the historic anomaly heap, Carl Maria von Weber was - by his birth-death dates - an almost exact contemporary of Beethoven, but wrote, from the get-go, music which is romantic in style, form and procedures - the first truly 'romantic' composer. It seems textbooks are dumbed-down to give a nutshell overview, and that is where the 'anomalies' are overlooked: in trying to do a large, global but cursory job of explaining hundreds of years of musical development and progress, some Big Mistakes are set into print.


I agree fully with all you say. In fact I said more or less exactly the same thing previously, including the reference to Weber.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

It's almost as if some people don't want Beethoven to be considered a 'Classical' composer; like it's an insult.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Mozart is a Romantic:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've performed Battalia with some other string players. Second movement is so much fun. Reminds me of Charles Ives.


----------



## Toddlertoddy (Sep 17, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> and H.I.F. Biber was a Modernist ahead of Schoenberg:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If I guessed who this composer was, I would have said Bartok or Schnittke.


----------



## hocket (Feb 21, 2010)

Outside Haydn and Mozart I'd go with Boccherini and then CPE. Boccherini I'd probably take as much as anything from any era.

Others I like a lot include Sammartini, Richter, Johann Stamitz, Giovanni Battista Martini, Georg Matthias Monn, Leopold Hoffman, Vanhal, Cimarosa. I enjoyed the Brioschi disc too.

Someone like Reicha who was mentioned I'd tend to think of more as Romantic (not that he isn't Classical, just that I'd view Romanticism as doing something different with Classicism rather than being a break with it). Either way, I'm a fan.

Like StLuke's I've quite enjoyed the likes of Paisiello and Jomelli too (Perhaps earlier Neapolitans like Leonardo Vinci and Pergolesi deserve a mention?)


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Perhaps as opposed to the continual useless Mozart vs Modernism debate we might engage in more suggestions of music and/or specific performances from various eras that we found interesting... inspiring...

Recently having reorganized my CD collection and cataloged the whole of it for ease of access (and to avoid any more duplicate purchase) I have been pulling out a number of recordings that I simply haven't listened to for some time. Among these within the realm of the Classical Era is Rossini's _Stabat Mater_:


----------



## Llyranor (Dec 20, 2010)

I really need to explore more of the classical era outside of Mozart/Haydn.

-----





I find this Harpsichord & Fortepiano concerto by CPE Bach really interesting. It's fun to see the interplay between those two instruments.


----------



## oogabooha (Nov 22, 2011)

Say what you want about Mozart, but Don Giovanni is my favorite opera. It's such a prolific piece of work that I'm so excited to have found this on youtube. I'm watching it right now, and I'm happy that I'm spending my night doing this because I'm guaranteed to have no regrets.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Boccerini and Stamitz are enjoyable Symphonies. I got these 2 cd's.


----------

