# If Beethoven's "early period" was all we had from him?



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

It is likely that someone has asked this before but I couldn't find it.

Suppose Beethoven had died in 1802 at the age of 32 (and at the end of his "early period"), what would his reputation have been? We would never have heard so many of his greatest masterpieces. But we would still have 12 or so piano sonatas, six quartets, two symphonies, two piano concertos and much more. They are works we can't avoid hearing in the context of what was to come but, if there was nothing to come, they alone would represent Beethoven to us and I suspect we would hear them very differently to the way we hear them now.

For me his early period would still have been, easily, enough to name him one of the greats (greater than anyone else of the same time except for Haydn) but clearly not as great as he actually became. 

Incidentally, Schubert died at 31 but if Beethoven had died at 32 Schubert would presumably be known as the greater of the two (assuming he could have achieved his "mature" masterpieces without the example of Beethoven before him).


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

I think he would be ranked well below Haydn, to be honest. He'd be a niche interest for present day classical music fans. I'm not saying that's necessarily fair but I'm pretty sure it's true.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Enthusiast said:


> Incidentally, Schubert died at 31 but if Beethoven had died at 32 Schubert would presumably be known as the greater of the two


As a "song writer", yes. As a "classical music composer", no. Schubert has serious issues with form and structure that negate his superiority in melody against Beethoven. Looking at his development as a composer, if Schubert lived up to age 40~50, I think he would have written 2-hour long symphonies based on endless repetitions. 
Schubert ranks far lower than Haydn, Handel, lower than Hummel, CPE Bach in my book.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

^^^ Any excuse to pan Schubert. Now we get to compare him with CPE Bach, a bizarre idea. I thought the subject here was Beethoven.

Returning to the subject, I believe LvB was already a master composer before the "Eroica," good enough to ensure his position as one of the Classical period's "top three." His first two symphonies, three piano concertos, six quartets and the early piano sonatas were recognized as the work of a striking talent in his time and remain important in the repertoire. Had he died young we would simply think of him as a great composer who died too soon, the way we think of Schubert. Of course we'd have little idea of the radical directions he would take in his later work, and his influence on the course of music wouldn't have been the same.


----------



## Ras (Oct 6, 2017)

It is not only hard to phatom what Beethoven would have become if he hadn't become Beethoven - it is just as hard to imagine what 19th century Romanticism would have been without him... or for that matter the entire music history that followed!


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

Very strange question, as every one has to do with an "if". I believe that Beethoven had made enough until the age of 32 to be better than many composers. In these composers are not included Bruckner, Tschaikowsky etc. Beethoven managed to surpass them with his whole life work.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Brahms would have to compose 7 more symphonies


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2019)

The only early period pieces I listen to with real pleasure are the second symphony, the third piano concerto and some of the early piano sonatas. Beethoven wouldn't be an important composer to me.

I am tempted to say he would be a minor composer remembered for a few pieces, like Weber or Hummel.

But that neglects his influence, the later composers who would have eclipsed him were heavily influenced by him. It is unknowable, really.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Maybe a better question is what contribution the later works make to our understanding of the possibilities of music. I remember once asking people here if there was any music which was similar to the late quartets, and the answer seemed to be probably not. It could just be that his late music is just totally _sui generis_, like Hildegard and Hans-Joachim Hespos. If you took it out of the picture, we'd probably have lost something very fine, but music would have carried on in the same way.

The Middle period is something I don't know much about.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Given that Beethoven's early works can't hold a candle to his subsequent compositions, we would hardly ever hear about the man.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> Given that Beethoven's early works can't hold a candle to his subsequent compositions, we would hardly ever hear about the man.


The Eroica!

wsafcnhszkjbvfczs,kbvfc


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> The Eroica!
> 
> wsafcnhszkjbvfczs,kbvfc


The Eroica is "middle period" so no Eroica.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> Maybe a better question is what contribution the later works make to our understanding of the possibilities of music. I remember once asking people here if there was any music which was similar to the late quartets, and the answer seemed to be probably not. It could just be that his late music is just totally _sui generis_, like Hildegard and Hans-Joachim Hespos. If you took it out of the picture, we'd probably have lost something very fine, but music would have carried on in the same way.
> 
> The Middle period is something I don't know much about.


Certainly Beethoven was an big influence, but I don't buy the argument that he made a fundamental change in the direction that music was taking. It not like without Beethoven people would have been writing Haydn symphonies for the rest of the 19th century. After listening to some Weber I came to the conclusion that Beethoven was in some ways a conservative influence.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

But the early symphonies, sonatas and quartets were all great works and as good as (whatever that means) most of what Haydn and Mozart produced ... and there is a real sense that he moved beyond what they did (or were doing, in Haydn's case). I feel we may actually value them more highly than we do if they had not been followed by such astounding music. Certainly not a Weber or Hummel!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

If Beethoven had died at the end of 1802, we’d still have a lot of music from him that was the best of its time and would certainly be played and heard today.

3 piano concertos, esp. #1 and #3
2 big fat cello sonatas
Several piano sonatas, esp. the Pathetique, the Moonlight, and the Op. 31 set
The six Op. 18 quartets
2 symphonies, esp. #2

I suspect that these works would be held in even higher esteem since there would be no 2nd-period works to compare them to. We would lament the loss of this promising composer at the age of 32.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Enthusiast said:


> But the early symphonies, sonatas and quartets were all great works and as good as (whatever that means) most of what Haydn and Mozart produced ... and there is a real sense that he moved beyond what they did (or were doing, in Haydn's case). I feel we may actually value them more highly than we do if they had not been followed by such astounding music.


I feel the opposite. His early works get a boost in exposure because of all the great music he subsequently composed.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2019)

Looking back, some of the piano sonatas I thought of as "middle" are actually "early" by the conventional definition. That pushes up my notion of what his reputation would be. Certainly he would have been an innovative and important composer of piano music.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

I think he probably would be equal to for example:

-Carl Maria Von Weber 
-Corelli
-Alkan
-etc.

With other words, his genius would be noticed by some (me of course!!) but no way he would stand next to Mozart, Bach, Haydn, Liszt and other big names; maybe not even next to someone like Mendelssohn. Looking back it's easy to state that his early works are genius too, but without the obvious dramatic and revolutionary change in his later work, those early works would struggle to keep up with the work of the big names.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

And I add the following statement:

Take the whole of for example Mozarts oeuvre (or Haydn or even CPE bach or...), pick the most modern or revolutionary pieces of that whole of works and you easily match Beethovens early work in my opinion, easily!!


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Romantic music would develop with LvB or without him, just like music progressed without Bach being widely known. Chopin had other sources to draw influence from than Beethoven and Berlioz was idiosyncratic enough that he would innovate anyway. Also, with a combined legend of both Mozart and the one who everyone said was his successor dying quite young, others would try to step in. 
Alkan, Liszt, Tchaikovsky and Dvorak would also "happen" anyway. Wagner as well. What would stop Wagner from becoming Wagner? Opera music wasn't that influenced by Beethoven, was it?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Fabulin said:


> What would stop Wagner from becoming Wagner? Opera music wasn't that influenced by Beethoven, was it?


Wagner considered Beethoven the most crucial of influences on his own music and philosophy of music. He studied his works, including the late quartets which he revered, wrote about him in a lengthy essay ("Beethoven," from 1870, the Beethoven centennial), and opened the first Bayreuth festival by conducting the 9th symphony. The development and unification of large-scale structures out of pregnant motifs descends from Beethoven, not from any previous opera composer.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> The development and unification of large-scale structures out of pregnant motifs descends from Beethoven


Right well there's something concrete, I don't know if it's true or not but it's concrete at least.


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

After 42 years in music, I can assure you, that to write only one page of classical music is tremendously difficult, because it requires respect for the rules of the classical harmony and huge fantasy /creativity to make something beautiful without to violate them. It is, as I say to my students, dancing the moment your legs and hands are tied with a thick rope. If you only could imagine what Beethoven had done under these circumstances, plus he was incapable to hear anything, or the Mozart, who was dying when he composing the Requiem etc, it is clear that we are speaking for super humans, who deserve only our respect and admiration.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Even in his early string quartets, he knew what he was doing. Skip his first six if you want to miss out on the development of his genius. They're vibrant, energetic, suspenseful, lyrical, and delightful with his four-part writing, including some long passages. He was already one of the finest most imaginative composers in Europe. There is no doubt in these quartets or indecision. He was doing exactly what he wanted to do and they really lay the groundwork for the future. He's just as recognizable in the confident boldness of his early quartets as in his later ones.

https://www.classicfm.com/composers/beethoven/guides/beethovens-music-string-quartets/


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Razumovskymas said:


> Take the whole of for example Mozarts oeuvre (or Haydn or even CPE bach or...), pick the most modern or revolutionary pieces of that whole of works and you easily match Beethovens early work in my opinion, easily!!


Really?
I find this more impressive than the finale of Beethoven's Op.131





and this more impressive than the first movement of Beethoven's Op.111


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

If Beethoven had died at 32, a bit older than Schubert, would he outrank Schubert? I think not.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Open Book said:


> If Beethoven had died at 32, a bit older than Schubert, would he outrank Schubert? I think not.


If Beethoven had died at 32, would Schubert have become the Schubert we know?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Woodduck said:


> ^^^ Any excuse to pan Schubert. Now we get to compare him with CPE Bach, a bizarre idea. I thought the subject here was Beethoven.
> 
> Returning to the subject, I believe LvB was already a master composer before the "Eroica," good enough to ensure his position as one of the Classical period's "top three." His first two symphonies, three piano concertos, six quartets and the early piano sonatas were recognized as the work of a striking talent in his time and remain important in the repertoire. Had he died young we would simply think of him as a great composer who died too soon, the way we think of Schubert. Of course we'd have little idea of the radical directions he would take in his later work, and his influence on the course of music wouldn't have been the same.


Beg to differ here - Schubert at 31 left behind some epic symphonic and chamber works

Beethoven at 32 would not have done.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

PlaySalieri said:


> Beg to differ here - Schubert at 31 left behind some epic symphonic and chamber works
> 
> Beethoven at 32 would not have done.


I suggest, again, that Schubert's development as a composer was deeply influenced by the music Beethoven wrote well after 1802, which Schubert studied assiduously. If Beethoven had died young without writing that music, Schubert might have been a lesser composer.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2019)

KenOC said:


> I suggest, again, that Schubert's development as a composer was deeply influenced by the music Beethoven wrote well after 1802, which Schubert studied assiduously. If Beethoven had died young without writing that music, Schubert might have been a lesser composer.


I don't doubt Schubert was influenced by Beethoven but I find it hard to believe that he would have been a _lesser_ composer without exposure to Beethoven. He would have been a different composer, but I believe his talent and drive to express himself would have found an outlet, Beethoven or no Beethoven. Maybe he would have been a better composer without Beethoven's influence.

I used to carelessly think that Schubert's "Death and the Maiden" quartet was influenced by the Beethoven's Late Quartets, then I looked them up and found it had been composed before Beethoven's Op 127! If anything, I think of Schubert as a kindred spirit to Mozart.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Baron Scarpia said:


> I used to carelessly think that Schubert's "Death and the Maiden" quartet was influenced by the Beethoven's Late Quartets, then I looked them up and found it had been composed before Beethoven's Op 127! If anything, I think of Schubert as a kindred spirit to Mozart.


Charles Rosen commented on Count Waldstein's writing that Beethoven, then leaving for Vienna, would "receive the spirit of Mozart from the hands of Haydn": He said that of course this didn't happen, and that it was Schubert who ultimately received Mozart's spirit.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

KenOC said:


> If Beethoven had died at 32, would Schubert have become the Schubert we know?


That's hard to say. But at least we know that he probably wouldn't have become Allan Pettersson or Alfred Schnittke. 

I believe Schubert knew that he couldn't compete with Beethoven and that's why he didn't try and wrote more lyrically. He was maturing, making tremendous progress, during the last year of his life with his greater interest in counterpoint, an example being his great Fantasy in F Minor, which is still played today and as melodically memorable as so many of his other inspired works.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

...............


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

This is an interesting topic. When I first read it, for a moment I thought about it seriously and briefly had a feeling of dread. What he composed after 1802 has meant so much to me I couldn’t fathom having lived without it. I hope it wouldn’t be considered too off-topic to take this one step further and ask where Beethoven would stand if he had died in 1812 (the end of his 2nd period)?


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> Wagner considered Beethoven the most crucial of influences on his own music and philosophy of music. He studied his works, including the late quartets which he revered, wrote about him in a lengthy essay ("Beethoven," from 1870, the Beethoven centennial), and opened the first Bayreuth festival by conducting the 9th symphony. The development and unification of large-scale structures out of pregnant motifs descends from Beethoven, not from any previous opera composer.


What's a pregnant motif?

And did Beethoven's one opera have much of an effect on Wagner, or was Wagner more influenced by other music of Beethoven?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Open Book said:


> What's a pregnant motif?
> 
> And did Beethoven's one opera have much of an effect on Wagner, or was Wagner more influenced by other music of Beethoven?


By "pregnant motif" I mean a brief musical figure having the potential for generating many uses and transformations. The use of short, arresting motifs to unify large-scale works, to create more extended melodies, and to function virtually as "characters" in a dramatic narrative, are techniques central to Wagner's mature music for which Beethoven's innovations clearly provided inspiration.

Wagner was powerfully affected by _Fidelio_ in his youth, and went on to study closely all of Beethoven's music. He also theorized that by pushing abstract music to a level of dramatic intensity and emotional specificity beyond which the addition of words was the next logical step (in the 9th symphony) Beethoven pointed to the historical inevitability of the Wagnerian music drama.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Larkenfield said:


> I believe Schubert knew that he couldn't compete with Beethoven and that's why he didn't try and wrote more lyrically. He was maturing, making tremendous progress, during the last year of his life with his greater interest in counterpoint, an example being his great *Fantasy in F Minor*, which is still played today and as melodically memorable as so many of his other inspired works.


https://www.loc.gov/collections/mol...e-to-archives/allegro-and-andante-in-f-minor/
"...Schubert's F Minor Fantasy for piano four-hands, op. 103 (D. 940, 1828), suggests his reaction to the whole of Mozart's piece..."

"...The four-staff version of the work in both manuscripts and in the Neue Mozart-Ausgabe can without further ado be played four-hands, even though it has not been specifically arranged for that purpose,..."










One of instances Schubert making 'parallels' with Mozart, rather than Beethoven. Schubert's other parallels to Mozart include his 5th symphony and Fantasie in C minor D993


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I do wonder if those who see little of first rank value in Beethoven's early masterpieces are people who don't greatly value the Classical period anyway? Or is the argument that the early Beethoven's works are "not as good as" late Mozart and Haydn? If the latter that is probably true but still the early Beethoven works do take things further and are striking pieces that are both delightful and filled with invention. Can anyone really listen to one of the Op.18 quartets and not hear a major voice? Or one of the first two symphonies. Or one of the first three piano concertos? Who from the Classical period but Mozart and Haydn had composed such striking and inventive works? No-one, I think. It seems to me also that Beethoven had a very distinctive voice from the start.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> Wagner considered Beethoven the most crucial of influences on his own music and philosophy of music. He studied his works, including the late quartets which he revered, wrote about him in a lengthy essay ("Beethoven," from 1870, the Beethoven centennial), and opened the first Bayreuth festival by conducting the 9th symphony. The development and unification of large-scale structures out of pregnant motifs descends from Beethoven, not from any previous opera composer.


By "large-scale structures out of pregnant motifs", you mean the four-note motif Beethoven uses a lot throughout his oeuvre? Beethoven tends to build his works on that motif quite often, even his other works, - 5th symphony and Appassionata sonata. Sure, he may have used it as an 'unifying factor' in the Ninth symphony. But I don't think of the motif and its use as something particularly unique to the Ninth symphony. 
I like to think it's more like a 'signature move' he resorts to when he can't think of anything better. (I'm not saying it's a bad thing, I like it too)
Anyway, it's ironic that Wagner also wanted to "fix" the ninth symphony. Don Giovanni, on the other hand, was regarded by Wagner to be flawless.

_"In his influential article of 1873, 'Zum Vortrage der neunten Symphonie Beethoven's' ('Performing Beethoven's Ninth Symphony'), he set out his ideas about how that could be achieved and his reasons for modifying the work's existing orchestration. For Wagner, Beethoven's deafness, and the more primitive instruments available to him, meant that certain passages lacked clarity and brilliance. Wagner's aim was to rectify these shortcomings" _
(The iconic symphony: performing Beethoven's Ninth Wagner's Way by Raymond Holden https://www.jstor.org/stable/41440727?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents)

_"Wagner asked, 'Is it possible to find anything more perfect than every piece in Don Giovanni? Where else has music individualized and characterized so surely?'"_
https://books.google.ca/books?id=2NN9y_7fZZoC&pg=PA159


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Enthusiast said:


> Or one of the first three piano concertos?


The third is after the cut-off date. Relevant, as the jump in quality from the first two to the third is substantial (at least as far as my listening pleasure is concerned).


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

I do feel there is an issue regarding reading too much into the unifying quality of such motifs employed by Beethoven. Are we not then forced to link the second movement of the Eroica and first movement of the ninth with his fifth symphony?


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

He'd probably be remembered the way other composers are who are mostly famous for a handful of works that survive as part of the canon. We'd today look at the quality of those few years and lament what could've been.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

....................................................


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Eva Yojimbo said:


> He'd probably be remembered the way other composers are who are mostly famous for a handful of works that survive as part of the canon. We'd today look at the quality of those few years and lament what could've been.


Can you think of a composer who died after writing a handful of such masterpieces? Who do you have in mind?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

hammeredklavier said:


> Let's not forget CPE Bach, whose masterpieces can match some of Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, I think.


That's a matter of opinion! I love a lot of CPE Bach but it has never seemed to me that he was "in the same league as" Mozart and Haydn. Early Beethoven clearly (IMO!) was and I think we would know that even if we had never had the glorious Middle and Late periods.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> Can you think of a composer who died after writing a handful of such masterpieces? Who do you have in mind?


I was actually trying to think of such a composer and my mind was blanking on examples! Mendelssohn is the closest I can think of, but he died with more masterpieces than what Beethoven had in his early period. Mussorgsky might be another candidate, though he did live until the "ripe old age" of 42. Purcell is a third option... perhaps the best one, the more I think about it.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> By "large-scale structures out of pregnant motifs", you mean the four-note motif Beethoven uses a lot throughout his oeuvre? Beethoven tends to build his works on that motif quite often, even his other works, - 5th symphony and Appassionata sonata. Sure, he may have used it as an 'unifying factor' in the Ninth symphony. But I don't think of the motif and its use as something particularly unique to the Ninth symphony.


No, I do not mean merely the use of that particular motif in different works. The 5th symphony is only the most obvious and famous example of Beethoven's use of the "germ motif" principle. Try the first movement of the "Pathetique" sonata, a dramatic narrative entirely spun out of the brief rising scalar figure with which it begins. In the 9th symphony, a germ motif consisting of a rising and falling scale occurs in much of the work's thematic material. For an example of the use of germ motifs spanning more than a single work, check out the late quartets.



> I like to think it's more like a 'signature move' he resorts to when he can't think of anything better. (I'm not saying it's a bad thing, I like it too)


Ludicrous remark, the sort a person would make when he can't think of anything better.



> Anyway, it's ironic that Wagner also wanted to "fix" the ninth symphony.


Why is that ironic? Other people have tinkered with the orchestration of the 9th. Wagner did know a thing or two about orchestration, you know. Moreover, altering the works of earlier composers was quite common in those days. Do you know what changes Wagner made?



> Don Giovanni, on the other hand, was regarded by Wagner to be flawless.


What does Don Giovanni have to do with anything under discussion?

What is the point of your post? Is it just another example of your weird compulsion to put down any composer someone seems to be regarding too positively by playing the "Mozart card"?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Two packs of Mozart cards for use as appropriate.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Art Rock said:


> The third is after the cut-off date. Relevant, as the jump in quality from the first two to the third is substantial (at least as far as my listening pleasure is concerned).


It seems that the 3rd Piano Concerto is usually said to have been composed in 1800, well before the cut-off date. But there is a school of thought that it was composed later. I don't have the details on this but would love to hear them!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Apparently it is indeed unclear. First performance was 1803, first publication 1804. Some sources say it was composed 1800, some say later. The wikipedia link's reference for the latter requires subscription.


----------



## Guest (Oct 3, 2019)

Art Rock said:


> The third is after the cut-off date. Relevant, as the jump in quality from the first two to the third is substantial (at least as far as my listening pleasure is concerned).


Regarding the third piano concerto, I agree about the jump in quality and inventiveness, but not in style. It is my favorite Beethoven Piano Concerto, but it strikes me as having more in common with works like the second symphony than the "heroic" works that characterize the "middle" period. It seems to straddle the boundary with early period classicism and middle period inventiveness.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> What does Don Giovanni have to do with anything under discussion?
> 
> What is the point of your post? Is it just another example of your weird compulsion to put down any composer someone seems to be regarding too positively by playing the "Mozart card"?





Woodduck said:


> The development and unification of large-scale structures out of pregnant motifs descends from Beethoven, not from *any previous opera composer.*


I thought you had Mozart in mind when you said this, as one of the best examples of 'an opera composer before Beethoven'. Maybe I misinterpreted.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Art Rock said:


> Apparently it is indeed unclear. First performance was 1803, first publication 1804. Some sources say it was composed 1800, some say later. The wikipedia link's reference for the latter requires subscription.


I had always assumed that B had held the 3rd PC back from publication so that he could have exclusive use of it for a year or two (as he had done before). But that makes no sense given an 1803 premiere for the work. Also, the page turner at the premiere reported that very little of the piano solo part had been written out, and B played mostly from memory. That doesn't sound like a work that had been composed two or three years prior.

Finally, even by 1800 B was increasingly recognized as a major composer in Vienna, and any new works were in demand. It's hard to understand why he would have held this back.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> I thought you had Mozart in mind when you said this, as one of the best examples of 'an opera composer before Beethoven'. Maybe I misinterpreted.


If I had meant "not from Mozart" I would have said "not from Mozart." What I actually meant was "not from any opera composer before Wagner." I can see that "previous opera composer" could be misleading (previous to whom?), but even so there had been plenty of great operas besides Mozart's.

The point is that no opera composer before Wagner based his compositional method on the "quasi-symphonic" - quasi-Beethovenian, to be more accurate - transformation of motifs. We call these "leitmotifs" but Wagner called them _Grundthemen_ in recognition of their structural function. I think Beethoven would have approved of his term.


----------

