# Beethoven sometimes ponderous and overbearing?



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

I am a great admirer of Beethoven's music and in fact rate him 2nd to only Mozart in my preference. 

BUT........... I must admit I find some musical passages of his to be a bit overbearing, ponderous and "forced" at times. And at times he seems to emphasize..........and re-emphasize............and re-emphasize a point in the extreme. I find myself saying.........."OK, OK, I get it".

Anyone else have similar feelings?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Specific musical examples? I don't hear what you hear.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Specific musical examples? I don't hear what you hear.


Almost every composer has their respective pre-packaged case against them. Mozart's music isn't profound or emotional, Beethoven isn't subtle, Mahler's music is meandering/exaggerated, Haydn's music all sounds alike. "Insert serial music composer here"'s music sounds like noise. The list goes on.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Sounds like you're describing Bruckner in a way.

Anyway, I've never held that opinion on Beethoven.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

To the OP, it perhaps could be said of his Piano Sonatas, maybe. I'm not exactly sure if it's true or not. It may be blasphemy, but I'm not the hugest fan of piano sonatas in general (I enjoy them, just not my preferred genre). This is a pretty funny light-hearted parody of Beethoven's sonatas.

*Dudley Moore Beethoven Sonata Parody*


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Overbearing only if you're unprepared for an Attitude. Just because the universe has an opinion doesn't mean you need to agree with it.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

"Sometimes"? Yes. That is why I don't listen to the 5th symphony finale, Sonata #23, Violin sonata #9, Piano Concerto #3 in C minor, or the Emperor concerto very often.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

trazom said:


> "Sometimes"? Yes. That is why I don't listen to the 5th symphony finale, Sonata #23, Violin sonata #9, or the Emperor concerto very often.


For me, it's the 7th symphony. I love it (still in my top 10 favorite symphonies) but it's not something I can listen to too often, it's almost _too _much sometimes. By the time the 4th movement is halfway done. I'm almost overwhelmed by the sheer amount of energy (that's part of its appeal). Sometimes, I'm *almost *inclined to agree with Thomas Beecham's comment that the 7th sounds like a bunch of "yaks jumping about." :lol:

I definitely have to be in the right mood to listen to it. When I am, it always puts a smile on my face. It's life-affirming.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

poconoron said:


> I am a great admirer of Beethoven's music and in fact rate him 2nd to only Mozart in my preference.
> 
> BUT........... I must admit I find some musical passages of his to be a bit overbearing, ponderous and "forced" at times. And at times he seems to emphasize..........and re-emphasize............and re-emphasize a point in the extreme. I find myself saying.........."OK, OK, I get it".
> 
> Anyone else have similar feelings?


I also really like Beethoven, but I have to admit that I have similar feelings. Beethoven is a romantic composer using classical techniques, I guess one can think of him like that. In his symphonies, there are recurrent elements of 'dissonance' which, to me, worsen the listening experience. I can see what you mean with the 're-emphasizing' - for eg., in the Eroica symphony, with the loud fortes (1 note) being repeated 5 times I think.

Beethoven's symphonies are like massive bears, whereas Haydn's are more like agile wolves. It's true that Beethoven could sound more tragic and more profound than Haydn, but to me, music should evoke positive feelings, so I stick with Haydn. I find Beethoven's sonatas very good and enjoy them more than the symphonies. The piano concertos are masterpieces in terms of their melodic, structural and emotional content, but, once again, they lack the wit that I love so much in Haydn. It's all subjective I guess. From what I've heard of Beethoven's String quartets, they are very nice.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Yeah definitely. "Portentous" is my preferred word for it - "earnest", "worthy" perhaps as well? I like Beethoven most when there's a sense of flexibility and "light" (as in luminescence rather than "not heavy") - think the middle movements of symphony 5, the first movement of the Waldstein sonata, the second and last movement of the Emperor concerto in constrast to the rest of those works!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Beethoven ponderous? Overbearing? Much more talk like that and he'll be all over you like a steamroller! :lol:


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Yes, he's overbearing when using ostinato, as in the Eroica variations.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Ukko said:


> Overbearing only if you're unprepared for an Attitude. Just because the universe has an opinion doesn't mean you need to agree with it.


Again, I find myself wishing there were not just a _like_ option to click upon by way of approving of a post, but too, a _love it_ option as well.

_The_ composer whose brilliance lies, in some good part, with his almost unparalleled ability of planning surprise, a master of misdirection, red herrings, and then delivering that surprise to maximum dramatic effect. Trouble is -- with anything so sensationally dramatic -- that after a number of listens -- a sensational surprise is no longer a sensational surprise, and the overall effect begins to sorely pale. Without demoting his rank, many a seasoned listener, after usually a good amount of time, wearies of that sensationalism precisely because the effect is only good for so many listens.

But Luigi? Attitude? His Nibs Sergeant Major General Attitude hisself. Yeah!


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

What Beethoven lacked in genius he made up for in attitude...funny how rock music often gets criticized for the same thing around here. 

There is a lot of Beethoven I like and an equal or greater amount I dislike. There are moments of real genius in Beethoven and there is a whole lot of Haydn dressed up in attitude.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

tdc said:


> What Beethoven lacked in genius he made up for in attitude...funny how rock music often gets criticized for the same thing around here.
> 
> There is a lot of Beethoven I like and an equal or greater amount I dislike. There are moments of real genius in Beethoven and there is a whole lot of Haydn dressed up in attitude.


I almost certain that's what Beethoven himself thought, "What I lack in genius, I'll compensate with "attitude"! Now where did I leave that darn hearing aid? I can never find it.". Beethoven pushed the boundaries of the classical language; Fugues, Counterpoint, the Sonata form, and of course, Attitude.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

hpowders said:


> I don't hear what you hear.


That's exactly what Beethoven himself often said...


----------



## jimsumner (Jul 7, 2013)

tdc said:


> What Beethoven lacked in genius he made up for in attitude...funny how rock music often gets criticized for the same thing around here.
> 
> There is a lot of Beethoven I like and an equal or greater amount I dislike. There are moments of real genius in Beethoven and there is a whole lot of Haydn dressed up in attitude.


I don't think Beethoven lacked much in the genius department.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Almost every composer has their respective pre-packaged case against them. Mozart's music isn't profound or emotional, Beethoven isn't subtle, Mahler's music is meandering/exaggerated, Haydn's music all sounds alike. "Insert serial music composer here"'s music sounds like noise. The list goes on.


I even get criticized occasionally for excessive pithiness, so I am aware of that pre-packaged BS.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

brianvds said:


> That's exactly what Beethoven himself often said...


No! No! He said, "I don't enjoy hare like I do roast goose."


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Instead of Beethoven, one can insert the names of Bach, Handel, Bruckner, Wagner, Brahms, etc;

Just be glad such folks walked the earth and left us their "ponderous and overbearing" music because if they didn't, we would all be spiritually malnourished.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Beethoven pushed the boundaries of the classical language; Fugues, Counterpoint, the Sonata form, and of course, Attitude.


The Sonata form - yes. Attitude, certainly. Fugues and Counterpoint most certainly not. Unless you consider his struggles to be "pushing boundaries".


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

tdc said:


> The Sonata form - yes. Attitude, certainly. Fugues and Counterpoint most certainly not. Unless you consider his struggles to be "pushing boundaries".


I was tongue-in-cheek pointing out that "attitude" isn't a musical term. You saying he's "Haydn with attitude" doesn't make it so, you saying he compensated his "_lack of genius_" (lol) with "attitude" doesn't make it so. Also, if you think the only way he pushed the boundaries (i.e. innovation) of Classical music was with the Sonata form, I don't know what to tell you. There's plenty of information out there on the internet. Perhaps, start with the "Eroica" symphony.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

tdc said:


> What Beethoven lacked in genius he made up for in attitude...funny how rock music often gets criticized for the same thing around here.


Well, there's the sort like Beethoven, effin true genius and mega-innovator operative under all that attitude, and then there's just attitude running on not much else than fumes, which is like 99.999% of most adolescent attitude -- because it has little else to run on


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

PetrB said:


> ... and then there's just attitude running on not much else than fumes, which is like 99.999% of most adolescent attitude -- because it has little else to run on


That's rock-n'-roll, man!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

tdc said:


> The Sonata form - yes. Attitude, certainly. Fugues and Counterpoint most certainly not. Unless you consider his struggles to be "pushing boundaries".


Listened to the fugato in the funeral march of the Eroica lately? Or the Andante of the 7th? Or the finale of the 3rd Rasumovsky? Or many many others? Ludwig may not be Papa Bach, but if he's not in 2nd place in the fugue department I don't know who is.

(Forgot to mention the incredible fugue ending the Credo in the Missa Solemnis...and the one in the Gloria ain't chopped liver.)


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Morimur said:


> That's rock-n'-roll, man!


It just has to be raw 'n' rowdy, punk teen rebellion in your face, or if not, and if it has any serious pretensions of 'being musically sophisticated,' -- well, then, it just ain't rock 'n' roll no mo.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

All this chatter had made me spin up the Missa Solemnis, Gardner's 2014 version. Yep, a composer "whose reputation was build entirely on gossip." Yessir. A Haydn with an attitude. No doubt about it! Uh...but...


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Listened to the fugato in the funeral march of the Eroica lately? Or the Andante of the 7th? Or the finale of the 3rd Rasumovsky? Or many many others? Ludwig may not be Papa Bach, but if he's not in 2nd place in the fugue department I don't know who is.
> 
> (Forgot to mention the incredible fugue ending the Credo in the Missa Solemnis...and the one in the Gloria ain't chopped liver.)


Well, Haydn was a master of fugues as well, there are many excellent examples.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Well, Haydn was a master of fugues as well, there are many excellent examples.


Haydn wrote excellent fugues (too few!) Mozart likewise. Brahms did a few, Mendelssohn (early), even Berlioz and the Russians. I can't turn down a good fugue!


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Weston said:


> Yes, he's overbearing when using ostinato, as in the Eroica variations.


I hope you can say a bit more about this. What I hear in op 35 is a lot of slapstick humour in fact, not overbearingness.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Mandryka said:


> I hope you can say a bit more about this. What I hear in op 35 is a lot of slapstick humour in fact, not overbearingness.


Op. 35 -- Beethoven certainly whacks that keyboard in a way not usual in his time! But contemporary reviewers liked it and were impressed. Me too!

Prokofiev was listening, I think.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

@KenOC Well can't say I can agree that Beethoven was second in fugues and counterpoint to Bach, some other names have already been mentioned that are probably more deserving of that title and I'll add Bartok to that list. 

@PetrB can't deny Beethoven was a genius, but there seems to be a bit of evidence that he wasn't quite as much of a musical genius as Bach or Mozart, and personally I think I could add other names to this list too.

I also don't deny he was innovative and influential, but since according to my tastes the results of his influence on music over all generally weren't very good, (with yes some exceptions) I'm not that interested in those innovations. In my opinion music was better before Beethoven and it became better again after Beethoven and the movement he inspired (Romanticism) had run its course.

@ DiesIraeVIX this is of course all my opinion, nothing more, and I respect your right to disagree with my views! For the record I hate the Eroica Symphony so I'll pass on listening to it or reading up on it anymore than I already have, thanks.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> (Forgot to mention the incredible fugue ending the Credo in the Missa Solemnis...and the one in the Gloria ain't chopped liver.)


In the late work fugues become a very major part of the style - I think that the fugues in the late quartets, the Missa Solemnis, piano music are really interesting because, to me, they sound so *unlike* Bach and Handel. The genius here is to take an old form and make it sound modern.



KenOC said:


> Listened to the fugato in the funeral march of the Eroica lately? Or the Andante of the 7th? Or the finale of the 3rd Rasumovsky? Or many many others?


In the earlier work the fugal music seems less important, more incidental.


----------



## Guest (Sep 15, 2014)

poconoron said:


> BUT........... I must admit I find some musical passages of his to be a bit overbearing, ponderous and "forced" at times. [...]
> Anyone else have similar feelings?


Yes, but I like being 'forced'!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

tdc said:


> I also don't deny he was innovative and influential, but since according to my tastes the results of his influence on music over all generally weren't very good, (with yes some exceptions) I'm not that interested in those innovations. In my opinion music was better before Beethoven and it became better again after Beethoven and the movement he inspired (Romanticism) had run its course.


An interesting thought and worthy of a new thread, or more. I agree that Beethoven's influence on music was (at best) questionable, and may not have resulted in a positive outcome. But -- hey -- he was really good!

What was Shakespeare's influence on later plays? Good or bad? Hmmm... Some people spoil it for everybody.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Op. 35 -- Beethoven certainly whacks that keyboard in a way not usual in his time! But contemporary reviewers liked it and were impressed. Me too!
> 
> Prokofiev was listening, I think.


Yes well you may have a point there, I've grown so used to that sort of highly physical piano writing that I forget how innovative it music have sounded, thanks for the reply.

Is op 35 really the first example?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Mandryka said:


> Yes well you may have a point there, I've grown so used to that sort of highly physical piano writing that I forget how innovative it music have sounded, thanks for the reply.
> 
> Is op 35 really the first example?


An earlier doesn't occur to me. But maybe somebody else?


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> An earlier doesn't occur to me. But maybe somebody else?


There was keyboard writing which was physical - Scarlatti could write physical music, but maybe not for piano, I'm not sure.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

There's just no pleasing some people.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

And here I become unusually emotional and lose my temper like the great master.

Thanks to not being born in a musical family and living in a society whose only effort for (abruptly, irrelevantly I would say even) introducing classical to children was 'Peter and the Wolf' and 'The Four Seasons' I wasn't really exposed to Beethoven until I myself got into classical (because I'm a gnoseological snob). Along with Tchaikovsky, Debussy, Ravel, and many others I'm for the most part a Beethoven chunga-chunga-chunga detractor. One of the oldest criticisms is that he had a lot to say, but that he did not know how to (I do not agree with this view though). Beethoven has a thing for 'going forward' and the chunga-chunga-ffff orchestral tutti certainly helps as a dramatic device to achieve that objective and ---- all of you it is very 'forced', that's the whole point for it is one of the main means of expression, it is a fight, stasis and conformity as an obstacle that must be overcame; which is way many hate, or even find heavily ironic the finale to the ninth. A good load of Brahms does the same, most notably his first symphony very aptly hailed/criticized as 'Beethoven's tenth'. But there's also...



aleazk said:


> As much as I love Brahms, sometimes I find his severity a little 'stiff' and artificial, it's not the severity per se. Example: this [Rhapsody in b minor Op. 79 No. 1], it's a technical masterpiece, but it's also what I call 'grumpy music', i.e., it's so severe that it becomes grumpy (the main theme/rhythmic motif in particular, and the harmony). On the other hand, this [Rhapsody in G minor op. 79, no. 2] is also severe and grave, but it's a journey to the most obscure and devastating of your 'soul'.


Many others have done it, Bruckner in some of his abrupt brass chorales, Mahler in his 'banale' mood, etc. I find I, me, dislike (many of) his heavy spacings of chords, I would say those spacings are obsolete but that makes even less sense.

[I will asume I do not have to express all my admiration to this guy]

P.S. aleazk, I hope you won't be ashamed of seeing your own words in this context. If anything I envy your profile picture, and brain.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

poconoron said:


> I am a great admirer of Beethoven's music and in fact rate him 2nd to only Mozart in my preference.
> 
> BUT........... I must admit I find some musical passages of his to be a bit *overbearing, ponderous and "forced" at times*. And at times he seems to emphasize..........and re-emphasize............and re-emphasize a point in the extreme. I find myself saying.........."OK, OK, I get it".
> 
> Anyone else have similar feelings?


The problem comes in some of the barnstorming browbeating pieces after op 10 and before op 120. There's too much rhetoric and coercion. I'm thinking of things like the first movement of the Apassionata, some passages from the op 59 quartets.The symphonies I don't know so well.

He's not as bad as Shostakovich in this respect though, at least after the 3rd symphony.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Mandryka said:


> The problem comes in some of the barnstorming browbeating pieces after op 10 and before op 120. There's too much rhetoric and coercion. I'm thinking of things like the first movement of the Apassionata, some passages from the op 59 quartets.The symphonies I don't know so well.
> 
> He's not as bad as Shostakovich in this respect though, at least after the 3rd symphony.


Beethoven: "...factory-functional in structure; in content all rhetoric and coercion..." Oh wait, I'm getting my composers all mixed up!


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> And here I become unusually emotional and lose my temper like the great master.
> 
> Thanks to not being born in a musical family and living in a society whose only effort for (abruptly, irrelevantly I would say even) introducing classical to children was 'Peter and the Wolf' and 'The Four Seasons' I wasn't really exposed to Beethoven until I myself got into classical (because I'm a gnoseological snob). Along with Tchaikovsky, Debussy, Ravel, and many others I'm for the most part a Beethoven chunga-chunga-chunga detractor. One of the oldest criticisms is that he had a lot to say, but that he did not know how to (I do not agree with this view though). Beethoven has a thing for 'going forward' and the chunga-chunga-ffff orchestral tutti certainly helps as a dramatic device to achieve that objective and ---- all of you it is very 'forced', that's the whole point for it is one of the main means of expression, it is a fight, stasis and conformity as an obstacle that must be overcame; which is way many hate, or even find heavily ironic the finale to the ninth. A good load of Brahms does the same, most notably his first symphony very aptly hailed/criticized as 'Beethoven's tenth'. But there's also...
> 
> ...


I don't really find Beethoven's fortissimos (in the symphonies) that 'dramatic'; imo, they don't really add much to the content of the symphonies. I also don't think it is wise to be 'forced' for 'forced's sake' - music is, after all, created for the enjoyment of the listener - generally, the more 'natural' and 'honest' the music is, the easier it is for it to connect with a listener. Beethoven was very good at writing dramatic melodies and creating dramatic tension, that's true.


----------



## shangoyal (Sep 22, 2013)

Yes, music is often not as perfect as it sounds on the first few listens - that is why it's good to change what you are listening. Alternate strong aggressive music with more relaxed stuff...


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

shangoyal said:


> Yes, music is often not as perfect as it sounds on the first few listens - that is why it's good to change what you are listening. Alternate strong aggressive music with more relaxed stuff...


Proust thought the opposite, that with a masterpiece like a late Beethoven quartet, what you liked at the start you don't appreciate so much with increased awareness. And that's because new things show up for you, and these new things are the best things.

This describes my own experience recently with Peter Maxwell Davies's 3rd symphony.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

shangoyal said:


> Yes, music is often not as perfect as it sounds on the first few listens - that is why it's good to change what you are listening. Alternate strong aggressive music with more relaxed stuff...


Hehe, well I actually listen to metal too, it's not that I don't like 'aggressive' music. But you are right that variety is a great thing and that all composers, with their respective temperaments and stylistic leanings, contribute to the range of things we can hear.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

from a personal point of view I find this thread particularly intriguing, partially because I too have always felt slightly uneasy about Beethoven and it has often seemed quite difficult to express any reservations-firstly because I am not a formally trained musician and secondly because you are never prepared for how comments or observations may be perceived!

I recently posted an observation that the 7th is almost manic and that this is reflected in the Gardiner and ORR recording which I was then listening to. Earlier in the year I purchased the Harnoncourt set hoping that somehow he would throw some light on works that I had heard too frequently and did regard with some reserve. Having had the HvK 80's recordings I imagined that a new interpretation might be the way forward-bear in mind that the 'problem' is undoubtedly mine-I would never dispute Beethoven's genius-with the Harnoncourt set I found myself listening to the 2nd over and over again, energetic witty and approachable and obviously a work very 'grounded'in the classical tradition. Am I arriving at a conclusion?-not really but I sometimes wonder if certain aspects of Beethoven's music reflect such a marked sense of genius they are almost intimidating-I am aware that many see him as the most humane of men and I am not arguing with that,merely observing that certain compositions can appear almost too 'great'-I have not had the good fortune to visit the Sistine chapel for example and I wonder if my response to Michelangelo might not be similar?

these are only observations, personal and subjective but I find some of the observations made in the posts above almost reassuring-DisisraeVIX for example!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

No matter how great the composer, there are always going to be some for whom the shoe is simply not the proper fit.
There are plenty of other composers to choose from to make us all happy.
Listen to what you like.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> To the OP, it perhaps could be said of his Piano Sonatas, maybe. I'm not exactly sure if it's true or not. It may be blasphemy, but I'm not the hugest fan of piano sonatas in general (I enjoy them, just not my preferred genre). This is a pretty funny light-hearted parody of Beethoven's sonatas.
> 
> *Dudley Moore Beethoven Sonata Parody*


Now, _that's_ a coda!


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

hpowders said:


> No matter how great the composer, there are always going to be some for whom the shoe is simply not the proper fit.
> There are plenty of other composers to choose from to make us all happy.
> Listen to what you like.


yes, and read what you like, wear what you want. go wherever takes your fancy but then again is it not just a little more interesting and even inspiring to have the opportunity to discuss ideas with other interested parties?


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

PetrB said:


> _The_ composer whose brilliance lies, in some good part, with his almost unparalleled ability of planning surprise, a master of misdirection, red herrings, and then delivering that surprise to maximum dramatic effect. Trouble is -- with anything so sensationally dramatic -- that after a number of listens -- a sensational surprise is no longer a sensational surprise, and the overall effect begins to sorely pale. Without demoting his rank, many a seasoned listener, after usually a good amount of time, wearies of that sensationalism precisely because the effect is only good for so many listens.
> 
> But Luigi? Attitude? His Nibs Sergeant Major General Attitude hisself. Yeah!


I can't say I fully agree with this, I'm not sure the near 200 yrs of Post-Beethoven history would either. Either way, that's besides the point. I agree with some of this, just not the "sensationalism" and musical "red-herrings", but I do think that some of the *excitement* is lost after repeated listens for *ANY* composer. I am always envious of those new to classical. Those who have yet to hear Beethoven's 9th for the very first time, Mozart's 38th, Mahler's 6th, etc. it's a wonderful 1st experience!

What you're failing to catch, PetrB, is the excitement of discovery. Discovering things you didn't hear the first time around. The musical structure revealing itself to you after so many listens, new meanings to extract, new interpretations. I heard things in Beethoven's 3rd after repeated listens that I didn't catch the 1st time. The Grosse Fuge has been exponentially more rewarding with repeated listens, it's revealed itself like a good book that requires multiple reads. You're denying Beethoven's music the ability to keep on sharing its musical gifts, as if all he had to offer were surface-level cheap sensationalism and nothing more. The celebrity tabloid of composers. This is blatantly wrong. 
It's no different than Mahler, Mozart, Bach or Stravinsky. The initial excitement wears off, but so what, what comes after is just as rewarding!!


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

If Beethoven wasn't 'sometimes ponderous and overbearing' would he have the impact that he had? If his entire output of music was in the Haydn-Mozart style like in his early period, would we even know the name Beethoven today or he would be totally irrelevant? Would the romantic period of CM exists as we know it?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Whether you find Beethoven's fiery temperament and his sense of life as heroic struggle overbearing depends on how easily you are overborne.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

PetrB said:


> _The_ composer whose brilliance lies, in some good part, with his almost unparalleled ability of *planning surprise*, a master of misdirection, red herrings, and then delivering that surprise to maximum dramatic effect. Trouble is -- with anything so sensationally dramatic -- that after a number of listens -- a sensational surprise is no longer a sensational surprise, and the overall effect begins to sorely pale. Without demoting his rank, many a seasoned listener, after usually a good amount of time, wearies of that sensationalism precisely because the effect is only good for so many listens.
> 
> But Luigi? Attitude? His Nibs Sergeant Major General Attitude hisself. Yeah!


The greatness is not in the surprise, but in the planning. What keeps us coming back is not the sensation of surprise, but the sensation of inevitability - the powerful fact of being convinced, as we listen, that Beethoven's struggle to find exactly the right notes to follow one another has succeeded brilliantly, whatever the challenge he has given himself. At the outermost reaches of his creative mind, in those astonishing late sonatas and quartets, overflowing as they are with more ideas than one would expect a single brain to hold without exploding, both the challenge and the achievement defy comprehension.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

The characteristics I notice:

Beethoven was playing the first really "good" pianos. so naturally he exploited the loud-soft characteristics and increased speed of action.

Beethoven used dynamic contrasts, in the piano works and all of the rest.

He would reduce harmony to nothing, and emphasize a single melody-line or theme in octaves. The result is very simple and emphatic, and also harmonically ambiguous: what chord is this? What key are we in? Like in the beginning of the Fifth. "Less is more."

He was the "Teddy Roosevelt" of the piano.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

If you approached Beethoven and wrote in his conversation book that his music was "ponderous and overbearing", he would box your ears!


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

Woodduck said:


> Whether you find Beethoven's fiery temperament and his sense of life as heroic struggle overbearing depends on how easily you are overborne.


I don't think that's the case. In fact, being 'overborne' by a piece I interpret as having been moved by it. With pieces like those we're discussing, each successive listen makes it more difficult for me to be overborne. You can find a piece overbearing without being convinced or moved by it, the same way film connoisseurs can find a Lifetime or Christopher Columbus film sappy and manipulative without being manipulated/moved by it.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

^^^ To defend what I believe Woodduck meant by his concise post. Overborne is the past participle of overbear, so I'm not sure how something overbears you but you aren't overborne by it. Same word, not sure the meaning changes when used in the past participle. Just wanted to throw that out there.


----------



## OldFashionedGirl (Jul 21, 2013)

I don't find Beethoven music ponderous and overbearing. He was a dude who through music pulled out his turbulent inner life.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Overborne is the past participle of overbear


I know.



DiesIraeVIX said:


> so I'm not sure how something overbears you but you aren't overborne by it.


From the Google definition:



> overcome by emotional pressure or physical force.
> "his will had not been overborne by another's influence"


Everything in my post follows this definition. I'm not sure what the problem is.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

trazom said:


> Everything in my post follows this definition. I'm not sure what the problem is.


You'll have to forgive me, I only meant that Woodduck was replying to the OP and the OP precisely meant Overbear in the negative connotation. Just a misunderstanding because you were replying to Woodduck with a different definition (connotation, rather) than the one he was directly addressing.

My apologies for the misunderstanding.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Listening to Beethoven's Cello Sonata #4, Op. 102 #1. About 15 minutes. Yes, it knocks you about, but by nothing more than sheer musical intelligence, concentrated so much that it becomes almost a physical force. I can't imagine a reaction to this other than awe and wonder.

Overbearing? Yes, in a way...


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Listening to Beethoven's Cello Sonata #4, Op. 102 #1. About 15 minutes. Yes, it knocks you about, but by nothing more than sheer musical intelligence, concentrated so much that it becomes almost a physical force. I can't imagine a reaction to this other than awe and wonder.
> 
> Overbearing? Yes, in a way...


The first movement sometimes reminds me of Brahms's piano sonatas for some reason, op 5, after the intro. I like the second movement more, at least before the style changes back to the style of the first at the end.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

If I'm in the mood for ponderous and overbearing I listen to Beethoven, if I want music that isn't I'll listen to someone else. Actually I'd reckon that if you find him ponderous and overbearing it's probably time to listen to someone else. Too much of any one composer is ponderous and overbearing. I hope this post isn't ponderous and overbearing, if it is please disregard and move on to the next.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

senza sordino said:


> If I'm in the mood for ponderous and overbearing I listen to Beethoven, if I want music that isn't I'll listen to someone else. Actually I'd reckon that if you find him ponderous and overbearing it's probably time to listen to someone else. Too much of any one composer is ponderous and overbearing. I hope this post isn't ponderous and overbearing, if it is please disregard and move on to the next.


Actually, what I tend to do is listen to some of his other pieces such as symphonies 4 and 6............ but I keep going back to his "heavier" pieces such as symphonies 5,7,9 and piano concertos 4,5 on occasion. They're just toooooooo good.

Even so, Beethoven probably takes up about 10% of my listening time to Mozart's 75% with 15% everyone else.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

poconoron said:


> I am a great admirer of Beethoven's music and in fact rate him 2nd to only Mozart in my preference.
> 
> BUT........... I must admit I find some musical passages of his to be a bit overbearing, ponderous and "forced" at times. And at times he seems to emphasize..........and re-emphasize............and re-emphasize a point in the extreme. I find myself saying.........."OK, OK, I get it".
> 
> Anyone else have similar feelings?


It marks the beginning of Romanticism. Brahms to Mahler, listen to their symphonies. It's all about "seriousness" make sure you sit up tight, wear your best gear and solemnly listen to what they have to say with 110% attention. It's very, very serious music.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> Yes, it knocks you about, but by nothing more than sheer musical intelligence, concentrated so much that it becomes almost a physical force.


Beethoven's musical intelligence I think was in how his music unfolds horizontally. He was a master of form and developing ideas, if you take just a snippet of his music, you generally don't get that concentrated genius you are describing, because I find vertically his music for the most part is very average. I can hear just a few seconds of a Bach or Ravel work and be completely captivated by the use of harmony. If I am not enjoying the harmonic textures, the way the ideas are developing isn't going to really help too much. As I've mentioned before Sonata form in general isn't a form of music I generally gravitate towards, so for listeners who are more interested in the vertical elements of music, I can certainly imagine reactions other than awe and wonder. As another poster here (I think it was Huilunsoitaja) said a while ago Beethoven's initial ideas and themes aren't very appealing (to some people) so to an extent it becomes rather inconsequential how he then develops those ideas, as he had failed to really captivate the listener in the first place.

That said, I do rather like the Beethoven cello sonatas I've listened to.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

If Beethoven is ponderous and overbearing, what does that make Wagner and Mahler? Beethoven's greatness isn't up for debate, but if one doesn't like his music, or at least appreciate it, the logical conclusion is that one has questionable taste.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Morimur said:


> but if one doesn't like his music, or at least appreciate it, the logical conclusion is that one has questionable taste.


Not sure if this is directed at me or in general, but this doesn't appear to be what anyone in this thread is stating including the OP who claims Beethoven is their 2nd favorite composer. I certainly appreciate Beethoven's music and acknowledge he was a genius. It is only when people start placing him on the same level as composers like Bach and Mozart, that I personally disagree, and I am not the only one. There are professional musicians and composers who have felt the same way. PetrB thinks Rameau was at least as great as Bach, which I don't agree with, but he obviously knows about music and has his reasons. The point is a certain amount of music listening will always be purely subjective.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

tdc said:


> Beethoven's musical intelligence I think was in how his music unfolds horizontally. He was a master of form and developing ideas, if you take just a snippet of his music, you generally don't get that concentrated genius you are describing, because I find vertically his music for the most part is very average. I can hear just a few seconds of a Bach or Ravel work and be completely captivated by the use of harmony. If I am not enjoying the harmonic textures, the way the ideas are developing isn't going to really help too much. As I've mentioned before Sonata form in general isn't a form of music I generally gravitate towards, so for listeners who are more interested in the vertical elements of music, I can certainly imagine reactions other than awe and wonder. As another poster here (I think it was Huilunsoitaja) said a while ago Beethoven's initial ideas and themes aren't very appealing (to some people) so to an extent it becomes rather inconsequential how he then develops those ideas, as he had failed to really captivate the listener in the first place.
> 
> That said, I do rather like the Beethoven cello sonatas I've listened to.


Although I must begin by shedding a little tear that you don't like Louie's music more than you do , I think you make an interesting observation here. Just as a work of literature may dwell lovingly on nuances of character and mise-en-scene, or may skate on past much of that in pursuit of narrative force, a musical work may revel in the piquancy of harmony and the sensuality of sonority, or it may emphasize the tension of events in time. Sonata form as developed in the classical period is pre-eminently the form concerned with time and the working out of the musical equivalent of plot. And Beethoven, responding to the philosophical, social, and artistic currents of the era we call Romantic - an era defined above all by the sense of man the individual as free agent, pursuing goals chosen not by God or society but by himself, and writing his own story - raised the musical plot to its highest level of ingenuity and narrative power. You are right to point out his relative (and I should emphasize _relative_) lack of interest in the momentary, or "vertical" effects of harmony and sonority. I do emphatically disagree, however, that this diminishes his greatness as a composer. No work of art can do or be everything; every artist knows that art must accept limits, that it requires hard choices, and that to do one thing one must forego doing something else. Beethoven made the choices he needed to make, and succeeded in doing a great many things unprecedented in music; in fact he spent a lifetime breaking new ground and leaving on that ground edifices of unassailable strength and perfection. He was the most progressive of geniuses, distinct from all others before him and embodying the fundamentally aspirational spirit of his time. Whether his aesthetic of progression - both in the musical forms he created and in the narrative of his creative career - is to one's liking is a matter of taste and temperament. But his rank as a genius in his art is something I for one would not presume to guage too finely.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Although I must begin by shedding a little tear that you don't like Louie's music more than you do , I think you make an interesting observation here. Just as a work of literature may dwell lovingly on nuances of character and mise-en-scene, or may skate on past much of that in pursuit of narrative force, a musical work may revel in the piquancy of harmony and the sensuality of sonority, or it may emphasize the tension of events in time. Sonata form as developed in the classical period is pre-eminently the form concerned with time and the working out of the musical equivalent of plot. And Beethoven, responding to the philosophical, social, and artistic currents of the era we call Romantic - an era defined above all by the sense of man the individual as free agent, pursuing goals chosen not by God or society but by himself, and writing his own story - raised the musical plot to its highest level of ingenuity and narrative power. You are right to point out his relative (and I should emphasize _relative_) lack of interest in the momentary, or "vertical" effects of harmony and sonority. I do emphatically disagree, however, that this diminishes his greatness as a composer. No work of art can do or be everything; every artist knows that art must accept limits, that it requires hard choices, and that to do one thing one must forego doing something else. Beethoven made the choices he needed to make, and succeeded in doing a great many things unprecedented in music; in fact he spent a lifetime breaking new ground and leaving on that ground edifices of unassailable strength and perfection. He was the most progressive of geniuses, distinct from all others before him and embodying the fundamentally aspirational spirit of his time. Whether his aesthetic of progression - both in the musical forms he created and in the narrative of his creative career - is to one's liking is a matter of taste and temperament. But his rank as a genius in his art is something I for one would not presume to guage too finely.


Agreed. . . (and thank you Aristotle from twenty-four centuries ago with your _Posterior Analytics_ and "Law of Identity.")

To be one type of masterpiece automatically means that it cannot simultaneously be another type of masterpiece-- at the same time and in the same respect.

We don't beat up Sir Christopher Wren because St. Paul's Cathedral isn't the Sistine Chapel.

So why should we beat up Beethoven because he isn't Bach?


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Although I must begin by shedding a little tear that you don't like Louie's music more than you do , I think you make an interesting observation here. Just as a work of literature may dwell lovingly on nuances of character and mise-en-scene, or may skate on past much of that in pursuit of narrative force, a musical work may revel in the piquancy of harmony and the sensuality of sonority, or it may emphasize the tension of events in time. Sonata form as developed in the classical period is pre-eminently the form concerned with time and the working out of the musical equivalent of plot. And Beethoven, responding to the philosophical, social, and artistic currents of the era we call Romantic - an era defined above all by the sense of man the individual as free agent, pursuing goals chosen not by God or society but by himself, and writing his own story - raised the musical plot to its highest level of ingenuity and narrative power. You are right to point out his relative (and I should emphasize _relative_) lack of interest in the momentary, or "vertical" effects of harmony and sonority. *I do emphatically disagree, however, that this diminishes his greatness as a composer. No work of art can do or be everything*; every artist knows that art must accept limits, that it requires hard choices, and that to do one thing one must forego doing something else. Beethoven made the choices he needed to make, and succeeded in doing a great many things unprecedented in music; in fact he spent a lifetime breaking new ground and leaving on that ground edifices of unassailable strength and perfection. He was the most progressive of geniuses, distinct from all others before him and embodying the fundamentally aspirational spirit of his time. *Whether his aesthetic of progression - both in the musical forms he created and in the narrative of his creative career - is to one's liking is a matter of taste and temperament. But his rank as a genius in his art is something I for one would not presume to guage too finely.*


There's really nothing I could possibly add to this. I second it completely, especially those two sections in bold.

"It isn't to my personal tastes so I question a composer's genius". I can't possibly begin to understand this line of reasoning.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)




----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Maybe we should be a little cautious about insulting Beethoven?


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> There's really nothing I could possibly add to this. I second it completely, especially those two sections in bold.
> 
> "*It isn't to my personal tastes so I question a composer's genius*". I can't possibly begin to understand this line of reasoning.


But really this isn't very different from the heaps of praise placed on Beethoven due to personal taste. Basically you seem to believe it is fine to essentially worship a composer if one thinks they are great, but not to think critically or question them if one isn't as enthusiastic about the music.

I feel I've been discussing my views with a lot of respect towards Beethoven, it is not as if I've claimed his music is trash. This is a music forum, should we only discuss the elements of music we like here? To tell you the truth I think it _is_ probably better to focus on what we like more but I think discussions might get a little boring after a while if that is all we ever focused on.

I feel my arguments are rational and present evidence that is beyond just subjective taste. Woodduck's post has some good points and starts off with the appearance of objectivity, but slowly builds almost to the point of cult worship, essentially suggesting it is not possible for Beethoven's music to have been top notch in form and also in harmony, counterpoint and orchestration - there is only so much a great man can do and that it is probably unwise to even question Beethoven's status in the canon.

Woodduck's argument that if a piece of art excels in one area, it cannot in another area, only goes so far. I don't really understand why a piece of music cannot have good form, and also be top-tier in other areas too - especially if that composer is often labelled the greatest of all time. The fact is it appears to me that those who place Beethoven highest up on a pedestal do so for primarily subjective reasons, because if we begin to talk about the more objective elements of composition, the arguments fall apart, and rather than point out counter-examples as to why these objective points are false, people prefer to return more or less to the hero worship, claiming essentially he was so innovative and influential we should ignore these short comings.

So, to be clear this is not me saying "I don't like Beethoven, so he wasn't that great" Its more along the lines of, "Hey I don't quite understand the level of hype around this composer - here are some pretty objective facts to explain to you why". What I get in response to this is more or less that his music could not be expected to be any greater than it was, and that I probably shouldn't even question his greatness.

When I stop seeing polls like the one KenOC recently made asking "who is the greatest composer? With Ludwig Van and Beethoven being the only two possible options, than I'll probably be fine with just keeping my opinions to myself. When I see stuff posted like that all the time I think I have a right to think critically and challenge opinions I disagree on.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

tdc said:


> When I stop seeing polls like the one KenOC recently made asking "who is the greatest composer? With Ludwig Van and Beethoven being the only two possible options, than I'll probably be fine with just keeping my opinions to myself. When I see stuff posted like that all the time I think I have a right to think critically and challenge opinions I disagree on.


Hey, c'mon now! I gave you a choice, didn't I? :lol:


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> Hey, c'mon now! I gave you a choice, didn't I? :lol:


:scold:ut::cheers::wave:


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

tdc said:


> When I stop seeing polls like the one KenOC recently made asking "who is the greatest composer? With Ludwig Van and Beethoven being the only two possible options, than I'll probably be fine with just keeping my opinions to myself. When I see stuff posted like that all the time I think I have a right to think critically and challenge opinions I disagree on.


Yes, you have every right to challenge, but challenging Beethoven's status is an uphill battle. Beethoven always wins.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

tdc said:


> But really this isn't very different from the heaps of praise placed on Beethoven due to personal taste. Basically you seem to believe it is fine to essentially worship a composer if one thinks they are great, but not to think critically or question them if one isn't as enthusiastic about the music.
> 
> I feel I've been discussing my views with a lot of respect towards Beethoven, it is not as if I've claimed his music is trash. This is a music forum, should we only discuss the elements of music we like here? To tell you the truth I think it _is_ probably better to focus on what we like more but I think discussions might get a little boring after a while if that is all we ever focused on.
> 
> ...


It isn't I, tdc, but you, who have taken my arguments too far. Whether I've come anywhere near "cult worship" I'll leave for others to decide (I've been accused of that with regard to Wagner as well, but only insofar as I worship greatness as such do I happily plead guilty to all such charges).

I never claimed that a work of art cannot excel in one area if it excels in another. I said only that no work of art can do or be everything, and that an artist makes necessary choices as to which elements of his work are emphasized, according to his formal or expressive purposes. An excellent case can be (and has been) made that Beethoven's music is superbly accomplished and completely apt in harmony, counterpoint, and orchestration _given his artistic goals_. This is precisely what every artist sets out to accomplish - the perfect tailoring of means to ends - and I have yet to encounter an argument to the effect that Beethoven failed in his pursuit of it. You may question the value of Beethoven's artistic ends or simply not care for them, but if you look at the technical means by which he chose to accomplish them you must evaluate these means primarily in terms of how well they serve their purpose. If Beethoven chose not to engage in greater contrapuntal density, harmonic complexity, or orchestral luxuriance, it is conceivably because he knew how to get his meaning across with the greatest and most telling economy of means, which, last time I looked, was an artistic virtue - one of the highest of artistic virtues, in fact, and one that requires of an artist a degree of perceptiveness and disciplined self-criticism that most artists strive for a lifetime to acquire. We may be certain that Beethoven had the ability to cram his compositions with a wealth of detail which might have detained and delighted us momentarily, but which he knew was not essential to tell his story. That he could tell stories of such power and complexity without a single uneccessary effect is not a defect but a hallmark of his genius.

You are perfectly justified in preferring music with more fat on its bones. That preference is no argument that the lean, sinewy art of Beethoven is "objectively" inferior. It is precisely its leanness that others perceive as a virtue.

Perhaps your statement that you "don't understand the level of hype around this composer" is the basic truth here.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> It isn't I, tdc, but you, who have taken my arguments too far. Whether I've come anywhere near "cult worship" I'll leave for others to decide (I've been accused of that with regard to Wagner as well, but only insofar as I worship greatness as such do I happily plead guilty to all such charges).
> 
> I never claimed that a work of art cannot excel in one area if it excels in another. I said only that no work of art can do or be everything, and that an artist makes necessary choices as to which elements of his work are emphasized, according to his formal or expressive purposes. An excellent case can be (and has been) made that Beethoven's music is superbly accomplished and completely apt in harmony, counterpoint, and orchestration _given his artistic goals_. This is precisely what every artist sets out to accomplish - the perfect tailoring of means to ends - and I have yet to encounter an argument to the effect that Beethoven failed in his pursuit of it. You may question the value of Beethoven's artistic ends or simply not care for them, but if you look at the technical means by which he chose to accomplish them you must evaluate these means primarily in terms of how well they serve their purpose. If Beethoven chose not to engage in greater contrapuntal density, harmonic complexity, or orchestral luxuriance, it is conceivably because he knew how to get his meaning across with the greatest and most telling economy of means, which, last time I looked, was an artistic virtue - one of the highest of artistic virtues, in fact, and one that requires of an artist a degree of perceptiveness and disciplined self-criticism that most artists strive for a lifetime to acquire. We may be certain that Beethoven had the ability to cram his compositions with a wealth of detail which might have detained and delighted us momentarily, but which he knew was not essential to tell his story. That he could tell stories of such power and complexity without a single uneccessary effect is not a defect but a hallmark of his genius.
> You are perfectly justified in preferring music with more fat on its bones. That preference is no argument that the lean, sinewy art of Beethoven is "objectively" inferior. It is precisely its leanness that others perceive as a virtue.
> ...


I, for one, certainly appreciate Beethoven's genius in that capacity-- and this is coming from someone entirely seduced by the densely-texured, harmonic-luxuriance of "Richard-'too-many-notes'-Strauss."


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

May I hire Woodduck to write my posts for me, please? I pay well. To whom do I speak to make this happen?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> May I hire Woodduck to write my posts for me, please? I pay well. To whom do I speak to make this happen?


You speak to Woodduck. He charges only enough to keep him in potatoes and Wagner operas.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Marschallin Blair said:


> I, for one, certainly appreciate Beethoven's genius in that capacity-- and this is coming from someone entirely seduced by the densely-texured, harmonic-luxuriance of "Richard-'too-many-notes'-Strauss."


And it's arguable that Strauss, in pursuit of his own completely unbeethovenian artistic goals, needed all the fifty hexagazillion notes he wrote.

Well, most of them...


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

> Originally Posted by Marschallin Blair
> 
> I, for one, certainly appreciate Beethoven's genius in that capacity-- and this is coming from someone entirely seduced by the densely-texured, harmonic-luxuriance of "Richard-'too-many-notes'-Strauss."





Woodduck said:


> And it's arguable that Strauss, in pursuit of his own completely unbeethovenian artistic goals, needed all the fifty hexagazillion notes he wrote.
> 
> Well, most of them...


He's a lot like Wagner that way. _;D_


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

As Beethoven might say, loosely translated from the coloquial German, "Hey!! I thought this thread was about ME!!!"


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

hpowders said:


> As Beethoven might say, loosely translated from the coloquial German, "Hey!! I thought this thread was about ME!!!"


Yeah, but Woodduck's a hard act to follow.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Marschallin Blair said:


> Yeah, but Woodduck's a hard act to follow.


If Beethoven got down to reading some of these recent posts, ear-boxing would be the activity of the day.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I can just see Beethoven now, "Strauss? Who the hell is Strauss??"


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

hpowders said:


> I can just see Beethoven now, "Strauss? Who the hell is Strauss??"


It wouldn't be out of character for him to be unkind to his conquerors.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Marschallin Blair said:


> He's a lot like Wagner that way. _;D_


We could say that it was Wagner who encouraged him - and Mahler, and Zemlinsky, and all the rest of the fin-de-siecle German beer-bellies whose "fat" Webern and Stravinsky and Satie sought to trim away. But - to bring us back to the basic argument - they all, fat or thin, found suitable means to their respective ends.

That said, Wagner, at least in his mature work, wastes far fewer notes than the sheer size of his works might suggest. He himself, in old age, contemplated thinning the orchestration of _Tristan_ a bit (probably out of pity for his singers). But by the time he gets to _Parsifal_, what is stunning is the economy of effect: every stroke tells. It's a Wagnerian virtue that's too little noted, and one that Strauss admitted to envying.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> We could say that it was Wagner who encouraged him - and Mahler, and Zemlinsky, and all the rest of the fin-de-siecle German beer-bellies whose "fat" Webern and Stravinsky and Satie sought to trim away. But - to bring us back to the basic argument - they all, fat or thin, found suitable means to their respective ends.
> 
> That said, Wagner, at least in his mature work, wastes far fewer notes than the sheer size of his works might suggest. He himself, in old age, contemplated thinning the orchestration of _Tristan_ a bit (probably out of pity for his singers). But by the time he gets to _Parsifal_, what is stunning is the economy of effect: every stroke tells. It's a Wagnerian virtue that's too little noted, and one that Strauss admitted to envying.


Special pleading, Duckie.

You're trying to stuff ten pounds of sausage into a one-pound casing which is designed for fillet mignon.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Marschallin Blair said:


> It wouldn't be out of character for him to be unkind to his conquerors.


Not a conqueror; simply one composer who completely outclasses the other. :tiphat:


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Not a conqueror; simply one composer who completely outclasses the other.


King Richard undeniably has that effect on me as well.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

tdc said:


> What Beethoven lacked in genius he made up for in attitude


Hmmm. He didn't lack much in genius, though, did he? The creator of the profound and sublime piano sonatas Opp 90, 101, 106, 109, 110 & 111 and the string quartets Op. 95, 127, 130 - 133 and 135? These have been bettered?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Not a conqueror; simply one composer who completely outclasses the other. :tiphat:


Strauss outclassing Beethoven??? Well, maybe if you're talking about Johann...


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Marschallin Blair said:


> Special pleading, Duckie.
> 
> You're trying to stuff ten pounds of sausage into a one-pound casing which is designed for fillet mignon.


Merely an observation intended to keep the conversation close to an established theme - artistic economy - and prevent a charmingly piquant comparison from getting out of hand.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

KenOC said:


> Strauss outclassing Beethoven??? Well, maybe if you're talking about Johann...


There was a time when I thought J. Strauss wrote the best music in the world. I think I was about 9.

Now I think that writing the greatest Viennese waltzes is a great enough distinction. Wein, Weib, Gesang - who could ask for more?


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

There has been a lot of complaining in this thread about the guy, near as I can tell most of it because of a personality clash - his and yours. A little bit left over for complaining that he didn't know how to use a full blown Romantic orchestra.

I am not going to say that those are foolish complaints. Note that, Lars - I ain't saying it.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Merely an observation intended to keep the conversation close to an established theme - artistic economy - and prevent a charmingly piquant comparison from getting out of hand.


No, you're right (when aren't you?): Beethoven is a musical god of form, economy, and sentiment--- with almost everything he puts his mind to, really.

Its just that I admittedly prefer the lavish, Rococo decadence of Versailles to the Apollonian austerities of Olympus.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Beethoven!! Beethoven!! How they malign thee!! :scold:


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> Yes, you have every right to challenge, but challenging Beethoven's status is an uphill battle. Beethoven always wins.


You are right, his status is assured. I suppose there are all sorts of reasons for that, some to do with the quality of the music.

But the thread isn't about status really. You can believe - I do believe - that some of his pieces are better than others. And the work which is less successful musically is marred by being ponderous and overbearing. And repetitive.

There are three Beethovens, what he did in the final phase is a different kettle of fish from what came before.


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

Reflecting further about the subject, what I find amazing on Beethoven most ego-centered 'ponderous and overbearing' period (the middle period) is that all this shell of ego was disrupted by life itself (deafness, lack of emotional companion, etc) and the result was some of the most profound, spiritual music ever made by mankind in his late period, totally transparent to the ego and grateful for life on the late sonatas and quartets.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> You are right, his status is assured. I suppose there are all sorts of reasons for that, some to do with the quality of the music.


Yeah, only some, very little most likely. Most of why his status or genius is secured because of "attitude". 

[Deleted]


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2014)

Apologies in advance if this has already been covered : I imagine there are not many here who would disagree that Beethoven's 'Battle Symphony' and 'The Glorious Moment' qualify for the _*Ponderous and Overbearing Trophy*_.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

julianoq said:


> Reflecting further about the subject, what I find amazing on Beethoven most ego-centered 'ponderous and overbearing' period (the middle period)...


The phrase "ponderous and overbearing," if I understand it correctly, is ascribed to Beethoven's middle period due to no more than eight works:

- Kreutzer violin sonata
- Waldstein and Appassionata piano sonatas
- Symphonies 3 and 5
- Coriolan and Egmont overtures
- Emperor piano concerto.

The other side of the balance sheet is much fuller: The remaining piano sonatas, symphonies 4, 6 and 8, piano concerto 4, the violin concerto, the great cello sonata in A, the two Op. 70 piano trios, all five middle-period string quartets, the Mass in C, the Op. 96 violin sonata, and (probably) the Archduke -- plus a host of lesser works. (Stopping at 1812...)

Do the few "heroic" works define Beethoven's middle period more accurately than the larger and equally fine group of pieces that aren't quite so heroic?


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

KenOC said:


> The phrase "ponderous and overbearing," if I understand it correctly, is ascribed to Beethoven's middle period due to no more than eight works:
> 
> - Kreutzer violin sonata
> - Waldstein and Appassionata piano sonatas
> ...


Good points and summation, my answer to your question would be both. I think Beethoven is defined equally by his Heroic period and his Late period. And that's a *great *thing.

It's curious, though, that an above poster would say that those ponderous and overbearing pieces, the heroic pieces, are "musically marred" or "less successful". Last time I checked, the "Eroica" Symphony, the 5th Symphony, and the 5th Piano Concerto are by no means "musically marred" or "less successful". In fact, I'm quite sure they're the complete opposite, actually.


----------



## kikko (Jun 19, 2014)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> *Dudley Moore Beethoven Sonata Parody*


AHAHAH omg I'm rolling on the floor!


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2014)

And what are those parodies? Well of course, *diminished 7ths everywhere* !


----------



## kikko (Jun 19, 2014)

I found this too






when he starts shaking his right hand before playing!

Sorry Schubert but you're really obsessed with fast and repeated notes! AHAHAH my poor lungs!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

KenOC said:


> The phrase "ponderous and overbearing," if I understand it correctly, is ascribed to Beethoven's middle period due to no more than eight works:
> 
> - Kreutzer violin sonata
> - Waldstein and Appassionata piano sonatas
> ...


Thank you for supplying some raw data to supplement the theory-heavy disquisitions of some of the more ponderous and overbearing Beethoven cultists around here. (Hey! Don't look at me... )

I suspect that few have actually calculated the proportion of LvB's works that could actually be construed as justifying these facile attributions and consequent efforts to demote him in the musical pantheon. I know I've never given it a thought until now. Maybe there are a few other works that could be added to your list, KenOC - some might want to include the Leonore overtures or bring in the bigger late works such as the Missa Solemnis and the 7th and 9th symphonies - but we are still left with the vast majority of his works which not even a listener unsympathetic to LvB could claim are ponderous or overbearing. Still, we have a popular image of Beethoven shaped largely by these few more strenuous or consciously heroic works. I think it comes down mainly to the fact that these qualities are the ones which most obviously set Beethoven apart from his predecessors Haydn and Mozart, and the ones that inspired subsequent composers in their pursuit of more and more intense and personal forms of expression. Beethoven did enact a musical revolution - or a number of them, depending on the scale of our inquiry - and so the music which _sounds_ most "revolutionary" is taken to be the music that's most "Beethovenian," and is the music which forms the common image of him to which people may respond postively or negatively.

It seems to be human nature to simplify and caricature, and the perpetually scowling countenance of old LvB makes that easy to do. But it doesn't take much looking at the full scope of his work to see the full scope of his humanity and range of expression, and to put these oversimplified, distorted images into perspective and, hopefully, to rest.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2014)

I can understand why people say that certain Beethoven works strike them as 'ponderous' and/or 'overbearing'. If played poorly, this can be clear. A point in case are the first minutes of this rendition :


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Yeah, only some, very little most likely. Most of why his status or genius is secured because of "attitude".
> 
> [Deleted]


And marketing.....


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

kikko said:


> I found this too
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hehe, that is excellent. Thanks for sharing the links, didn't know of him, unfortunately.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

As an addendum to Ken and Woodduck's observations: Many tend to ignore, or perhaps fail to get, the comic works that counterbalance the more impressive heroic and tragic ones. The Piano Sonata Op. 31, #3, the Eighth Symphony and the String Quartets Op. 59 #3 and Op. 135 are good examples.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

EdwardBast said:


> As an addendum to Ken and Woodduck's observations: Many tend to ignore, or perhaps fail to get, the comic works that counterbalance the more impressive heroic and tragic ones. The Piano Sonata Op. 31, #3, the Eighth Symphony and the String Quartets Op. 59 #3 and Op. 135 are good examples.


And let us not forget the wonderful, often forgotten "Elegie auf den Tod eines Pudels":


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Blancrocher said:


> And let us not forget the wonderful, often forgotten "Elegie auf den Tod eines Pudels":


Thanks for that! Never heard it. We have two poodles in our household, a standard and a miniature. A sad song.


----------

