# Favorite Schubert Piano Sonatas



## Hausmusik

Since we all seem to be talking Schubert piano sonatas lately, here is a companion to the "Favorite Beethoven Piano Sonatas" thread. 

(I was limited to 15 sonatas, so I left out some of the less-frequently recorded early sonatas. If one of your favorites is not listed, I'm sorry; please post it in the thread.)


----------



## DavidA

I voted for the last three sonatas. They are not among the greatest and most sublime works ever written for the piano. But I like plenty of the others.


----------



## Hausmusik

Thanks David, but it doesn't seem your votes were recorded. I hope you will enter them again.


----------



## DavidA

Done it! I think I forgot to press the vote now.


----------



## Vaneyes

I know Schubert Piano Sonatas primarily through the recs. of Richter, Lupu, Sokolov, Lewis, Brendel, Uchida. However, I've found from Day 1 and through many years, that these works are not essential listening for me. Whereas, the same genre from D. Scarlatti, Haydn, LvB, Scriabin, and others, are. 

If Schubert's disappeared from my collection, I sincerely would not miss them. I find them dissonant, lacking in musicality, which is not a problem for me decades later. 

Curious...does anyone else "suffer from this malaise"? I realize I/we are in the minority. They are universally held up as one of cats meows.


----------



## Hausmusik

Vaneyes said:


> If Schubert's [sonatas] disappeared from my collection, I sincerely would not miss them. I find them dissonant


"dissonant"? I've heard criticisms like overly repetitive, lacking in expected development of musical ideas, etc., and while I don't agree, I get where such criticisms are coming from. But this just doesn't compute for me. In fact, I guess I don't even really understand the criticism.


----------



## DavidA

Vaneyes said:


> I know Schubert Piano Sonatas primarily through the recs. of Richter, Lupu, Sokolov, Lewis, Brendel, Uchida. However, I've found from Day 1 and through many years, that these works are not essential listening for me. Whereas, the same genre from D. Scarlatti, Haydn, LvB, Scriabin, and others, are.
> 
> If Schubert's disappeared from my collection, I sincerely would not miss them. I find them dissonant, lacking in musicality, which is not a problem for me decades later.
> 
> Curious...does anyone else "suffer from this malaise"? I realize I/we are in the minority. They are universally held up as one of cats meows.


 I just think it is a matter of personal taste. Not everyone admires everything. I can't see what people see in Scriabin. I can't stand much of Mahler. But for some it's the ultimate. I love Rachmaninov but my wife doesn't dig him at all. There is no right or wrong. 
Just personal taste.

But for me Schubert is fantastic - especially the late sonatas and string quartets. Oh and Wintereisse, etc etc


----------



## Orange Soda King

Schubert's piano sonatas are so fantastic, and even though they're recognized as great, they are still overshadowed by Beethoven, though not to take away from him. In the end, I like 960 the most.


----------



## Vaneyes

DavidA said:


> I just think it is a matter of personal taste. Not everyone admires everything. I can't see what people see in Scriabin. I can't stand much of Mahler. But for some it's the ultimate. I love Rachmaninov but my wife doesn't dig him at all. There is no right or wrong.
> Just personal taste.
> 
> But for me Schubert is fantastic - especially the late sonatas and string quartets. Oh and Wintereisse, etc etc


Thank you for your response. My intent, as I think you realize, is not to bash, but to distinguish. Nor do I wish to hijack this thread. The focus should still be on the Piano Sonatas. I only offer the following to illustrate that it's not total rejection of a composer.

The String Quartets don't do much for me either (with a similar criticism I have for the sonatas). This is not to say I can't enjoy the playing of, as I do sometimes for the Piano Sonatas. Great artists getting the most from.

I do love the writing and playing of Schubert's "Trout", Piano Trios, Works for Violin and Piano, Impromptus, and Wintereisse.

The symphonies I find tedius, mostly due to the repetition Hausmusik mentioned. Again, playing can occasionally supersede writing here.

The String Quintet in C overstays.

I detest Wanderer Fantasy and Octet. Nothing can redeem these.

I remain puzzled by the carte blanche frequently given for all things Schubert. So far, it appears I'm alone in this matter "of taste" at TC.


----------



## neoshredder

Vaneyes said:


> Thank you for your response. My intent, as I think you realize, is not to bash, but to distinguish. Nor do I wish to hijack this thread. The focus should still be on the Piano Sonatas. I only offer the following to illustrate that it's not total rejection of a composer.
> 
> The String Quartets don't do much for me either (with a similar criticism I have for the sonatas). This is not to say I can't enjoy the playing of, as I do sometimes for the Piano Sonatas. Great artists getting the most from.
> 
> I do love the writing and playing of Schubert's "Trout", Piano Trios, Works for Violin and Piano, Impromptus, and Wintereisse.
> 
> The symphonies I find tedius, mostly due to the repetition Hausmusik mentioned. Again, playing can occasionally supersede writing here.
> 
> The String Quintet in C overstays.
> 
> I detest Wanderer Fantasy and Octet. Nothing can redeem these.
> 
> I remain puzzled by the carte blanche frequently given for all things Schubert. So far, it appears I'm alone in this matter "of taste" at TC.


And I'm alone on not enjoying Mahler's Symphonies. We all got our taste.


----------



## peeyaj

I have chosen the D.784, D.959 and D.960.. Heck I love them all! Especially the little gem, D.664 sonata played by Richter (watch him in Youtube).

It is important to note that:



> One of the reasons for the long period of neglect of Schubert's piano sonatas seems to be their dismissal as structurally and dramatically inferior to the sonatas of Beethoven. In fact, the last sonatas contain distinct allusions and similarities to works by Beethoven, a composer Schubert venerated. However, musicological analysis has shown that they maintain a mature, individual style. Schubert's last sonatas are now praised for their mature style, manifested in unique features such as a cyclical formal and tonal design, chamber music textures, and a rare depth of emotional expression....
> 
> _Schubert's piano sonatas seem to have been mostly neglected during the entire nineteenth century, often dismissed for being too long, lacking in formal coherence, being un-pianistic_, etc However, references to the last sonatas can be found among two nineteenth-century Romantic composers who took serious interest in Schubert's music and were influenced by it: Schumann and Brahms.
> 
> The negative attitude towards Schubert's piano sonatas persisted well into the twentieth century. Only around the centennial of Schubert's death did these works begin to receive serious attention and critical acclaim, with the writings of Donald Francis Tovey, and the public performances of Artur Schnabel and Eduard Erdmann. During the following decades, the sonatas, and especially the final trilogy, received growing attention, and by the end of the century, came to be regarded as *essential members of the classical piano repertoire*, frequently appearing on concert programs, studio recordings, and musicological writings. Some late twentieth century scholars have even argued that Schubert's last sonatas *should rank together with Beethoven's most mature sonatas.
> *
> 
> As mentioned above, Schubert's last sonatas have long been historically neglected, dismissed as inferior in style to Beethoven's piano sonatas. *However, the negative view has changed during the late twentieth century, and today these works are usually praised for their conveying of an idiosyncratic, personal Schubertian style, indeed quite different from Beethoven's, but holding its own virtues. In this mature style, the Classical perception of harmony and tonality, and the treatment of musical structure, are radically altered, generating a new, distinct type of sonata form.*


BTW, I hate Haydn.


----------



## neoshredder

peeyaj said:


> BTW, I hate Haydn.


Oh no you didn't. Especially since early Schubert sounds like Haydn.


----------



## KenOC

"He who hates Haydn hates life."


----------



## Novelette

D 958 in C Minor. 

The fourth movement is incredibly brilliant. Fun to play, fun to hear.


----------



## ProudSquire

Novelette said:


> D 958 in C Minor.
> 
> The fourth movement is incredibly brilliant. Fun to play, fun to hear.


I agree. The fourth movement is marvelous.


----------



## peeyaj

KenOC said:


> "He who hates Haydn hates life."


I hate Haydn and I love life.. Owwwss.. What does it become of me?


----------



## Novelette

It's like a knife in my heart, I adore Haydn.

At least we all seem to agree that Schubert is great. 

Still, I have to repeat what Neoshredder said; much of Schubert's music seems to descend directly from Haydn with little effect from Beethoven, with notable exceptions of course.


----------



## Vaneyes

Thank you peeyaj, for posting some history re Schubert Piano Sonatas range of acceptance. I believe I've read that before. Anyway, I don't feel so alone now. 

Fortunately, Schubert wrote enough, that I think it's quite irrational to reject his works entirely. And likewise for Haydn.

Unfortunately (re neoshredder), since Mahler was primarily ensconced in one genre, I can understand (though I don't agree with) his complete rejection. :tiphat:


----------



## Hausmusik

Vaneyes, the Fantasy and Octet are definitely uneven works. I nevertheless love the Octet on the basis of its best movements and enticing orchestration.

You rate Schubert's violin and piano pieces a lot higher than I do! I like Schubert's symphonies, but think his real genius was for more intimate genres.

For me, the summit of Schubert (aside from the "Trout," some earlier lieder, & some piano miniatures) is in a handful of sprawling masterpieces from his last years: the late string quartets, the string quintet, the second piano trio, _Winterreise, _and the last 2 piano sonatas (958 is, to me, too imitative of Beethoven to rank quite as high as 959 and 960). However, it took me a while to build up the attention span for the "heavenly lengths" of these sprawling pieces (whose length is part of what makes them so magnificent). Once I did, I was ready for Bruckner, who is similarly "spacious."

By the way, I disagree with Novelette that Schubert comes out of Haydn bypassing Beethoven. I think of Schubert's best works as bearing the stamp of Mozart, especially in the slow movements (compare the Octet with the Clarinet Quintet of Mozart) and symphonies (esp. #5), rather than of Haydn, and Beethoven's influence is unmistakable in (say) the 958 sonata.


----------



## Tristan

TheProudSquire said:


> I agree. The fourth movement is marvelous.


Double agreed  This is what got me interested in Schubert's piano sonatas


----------



## Novelette

Hausmusik said:


> By the way, I disagree with Novelette that Schubert comes out of Haydn bypassing Beethoven. I think of Schubert's best works as bearing the stamp of Mozart, especially in the slow movements (compare the Octet with the Clarinet Quintet of Mozart) and symphonies (esp. #5), than of Haydn, and Beethoven's influence is unmistakable in (say) the 958 sonata.


That's a fair point, Hausmusik. 

I wasn't even thinking of Schubert's piano music. I have this old impression of Schubert as being a good composer only of the piano, while his instrumental works were uninteresting. As time has gone on, I've come to see Schubert's great mastery of the symphonic and chamber forms, and I've come to recognize the subtlety. I no longer find Schubert better at the piano, rather, I find the totality of his output as being of the finest class.

His symphonies always struck me as resembling Haydn [and also Mozart] insofar as his music is understatedly refined. He isn't given to huge bursts of uncontrolled turbulence [although when he does, the results are astounding]; it isn't characterized so much by the effusive pathos of the Romantic as, say, Schumann and Brahms. In that way, I've seen the temper of his instrumental works as being more closely aligned with the temper of Haydn and Mozart, rather than the fury of Beethoven [with notable exceptions].

His works for piano are astounding, and often betray a very distinct influence of Beethoven.


----------



## peeyaj

Schubert symphonies were influenced:

1. Symphony no. 1 to 4 = Haydn/Mozart
2. Symphony no. 5 = Mozart
3. Symphony no. 6 = Rossini
4. Symphony no. 8 "Unfinished" = Schubert, his most personal work.
5. Symphony no. 9 = Beethoven

Schubert early quartets are unmistakably Haydn-like. It is only on Quartettsatz on 1820 that he would find his own voice on the string quartet. His Leider is revolutionary on his time. I haven't found any references that Schubert admired Josef Haydn's music.. His favorite composers were Michael Haydn, Mozart, Handel and Beethoven.


----------



## KenOC

peeyaj said:


> I haven't found any references that Schubert admired Josef Haydn's music.. His favorite composers were Michael Haydn, Mozart, Handel and Beethoven.


I read (somewhere) that Schubert had a real love-hate relationship with Beethoven, or with his music anyway. Some quotes that weren't at all complimentary...maybe earlier in his short career. Wouldn't be at all surprising! Anybody know about this?


----------



## Otter

KenOC said:


> I read (somewhere) that Schubert had a real love-hate relationship with Beethoven, or with his music anyway. Some quotes that weren't at all complimentary...maybe earlier in his short career. Wouldn't be at all surprising! Anybody know about this?


I believe when he was Salieri's student, Schubert took on the teacher's opinions and was drawn to the conservatism of Haydn's and Mozart's style. But as he grew musically, he began to embrace Beethoven more and more. I forget where I read this, though--perhaps the Brendel essays on the sonatas.

I voted for D.784 and the last four sonatas. I would have voted for the charming Little A-maj. sonata too, but I skimmed past it and didn't even notice it. Little indeed!


----------



## peeyaj

Otter said:


> I believe when he was Salieri's student, Schubert took on the teacher's opinions and was drawn to the conservatism of Haydn's and Mozart's style. But as he grew musically, he began to embrace Beethoven more and more. I forget where I read this, though--perhaps the Brendel essays on the sonatas.
> 
> I voted for D.784 and the last four sonatas. I would have voted for the charming Little A-maj. sonata too, but I skimmed past it and didn't even notice it. Little indeed!


Beethoven is the composer whom Schubert idolized all his life. 

The Little A major is such a charming piece especilly when played by Richter. I loooooveee it!!!


----------



## TurnaboutVox

I voted for the F-sharp minor sonata D.571, the A major D.664 (Richter played this very well); D.894 in G, especially Brendel's 1972 Philips recording, and (Wilhelm Kempff's) D.960.

If it had been there I'd also have voted for No.6 in E minor, D.566/506 which (though reconstructed) is an earlier and longer version of D.567, and is utterly charming. But there's something to enjoy in each and every one.


----------



## Pugg

After a long sneeze from the dust coming of this thread : I voted D960


----------



## Animal the Drummer

neoshredder said:


> And I'm alone on not enjoying Mahler's Symphonies. We all got our taste.


Actually you aren't, although I don't blame you for getting that impression. I recognise the immense craft which went into them but I've never actually managed to like them.


----------



## PeterF

Contrary to at least one person here, I love the music of Schubert and Haydn.
I particularly find many of Schuberts chamber music and solo piano works to be outstanding.
My votes went to Piano Sonata D.664, D.959 and D.960.
A recent acquisition of 2 piano sonatas by Canadian pianist Janina Flalkowska is wonderful.
My other favorite Schubert sonata pianists are Rudolf Serkin, Wilhelm Kempff and Walter Klein.


----------



## Pugg

PeterF said:


> Contrary to at least one person here, I love the music of Schubert and Haydn.
> I particularly find many of Schuberts chamber music and solo piano works to be outstanding.
> My votes went to Piano Sonata D.664, D.959 and D.960.
> A recent acquisition of 2 piano sonatas by Canadian pianist Janina Flalkowska is wonderful.
> My other favorite Schubert sonata pianists are Rudolf Serkin, Wilhelm Kempff and Walter Klein.


I like it to, nothing wrong with the sonatas 
:tiphat:


----------



## DavidA

I not with some horror I put a 'not' in the wrong place so it read:



DavidA said:


> I voted for the last three sonatas. They are not among the greatest and most sublime works ever written for the piano. But I like plenty of the others.


What I meant was:

I voted for the last three sonatas. They are among the greatest and most sublime works ever written for the piano. But I like plenty of the others.

What a debt we owe Schnabel for playing them when no-one else did!


----------



## Steatopygous

I didn't notice how old the thread was either. I trust that by now Vaneyes has listened again and come to a different conclusion. While taste is indisputably individual, Schubert's exalted place in the canon is no accident, and stems from musicians and their audiences relistening over the 20 th century. 
Benjamin Britten, no mean judge, ranked Schubert as perhaps the greatest of all composers for the incredible output of the last 18 months of Schubert's life, including the Great C major symphony, the final quartets, the string quintet, many, many lieder including the great song cycles, and, of course, the last three sonatas. And he was dead at 31! Five years younger than Mozart. 
A world without Schubert would be immeasurably impoverished. Thank goodness that we do not have to live in such a world!


----------



## helenora

The last one (D960). Full stop.


----------



## juliante

I am no aficionado of piano music, for sure. So can anyone tell me why D960 is so venerated? It's jolly pleasant and engaging throughout...and has a celestial duration I suppose. But it's no Hammerklavier by a country mile to my ears. Much as I adore Schubert.


----------



## andrzejmakal

I love Richter in D894
Cheers


----------



## cmb13

I am reopening this thread to comment that I was glad to come across it on a Google search, and joined the forum just to review the poll result (it wasn't coming up, but that may have been because I was using a mobile browser). I am new into classical music, and discovered the Schubert sonatas just weeks ago while pulling up random music on my iPhone while waking through LA. 

I am new to piano, having picked it up five years ago in my 40's, and also new to classical music...developed an interest as I have been learning to play. Thank you all in advance for the education!


----------



## philoctetes

"it's no Hammerklavier by a country mile to my ears"

But what is?

Just had to reply to a 2yo post because I'm listening to Yudina's Hammerklavier right now. Perhaps the best one I know.


----------



## Alkan

The Hammerklavier is a masterpiece... but I enjoy listening to Schubert's works more.


----------



## Eusebius12

Alkan said:


> The Hammerklavier is a masterpiece... but I enjoy listening to Schubert's works more.


D 960 is greater than the Hammerklavier...as music. The difference is that D960 reaches heavenly lengths, but for most listeners, the longueurs of the Hammerklavier fugue are truly hellish. As someone who appreciates the workmanship of the Hammerklavier, but is not overly enamoured of the tonal results (at least in the fugue. The adagio sostenuto is certainly heavenly. And the first 2 movements wear their rough manners engagingly enough).


----------



## Luchesi

Eusebius12 said:


> D 960 is greater than the Hammerklavier...as music. The difference is that D960 reaches heavenly lengths, but for most listeners, the longueurs of the Hammerklavier fugue are truly hellish. As someone who appreciates the workmanship of the Hammerklavier, but is not overly enamoured of the tonal results (at least in the fugue. The adagio sostenuto is certainly heavenly. And the first 2 movements wear their rough manners engagingly enough).


What do you think were the expressive intentions of Beethoven and Schubert here. I think everybody has their own idea by what we know about what was going on in their lives. Deafness, isolation. A progressively debilitating fatal illness.

Schubert seems to be so in love with composing music in these last sonatas. Beethoven was intent on always proving himself, if only to himself. Deaf people back then were very suspicious of everything.

Imagine if all the ideas we have about their psychological circumstances and their outlooks are wrong?


----------



## Luchesi

There's interesting information about Schubert's sonatas here;

http://dpbmss041010.blogspot.com/2013/12/schuberts-unfinished-piano-sonatas.html

"This post concerns all the largely unfinished or posthumously published works, none of which appear in the Integral Edition Series. Schubert wrote a lot of unfinished works that were fortunately not burned, as was often the fate of lesser or unfinished works by others."

D. 840
"This is another amazing discovery, the latest to be found unfinished work in this genre by Schubert. It was given the name "relique" in the belief that it was his last written piano sonata, but it was in fact written three years earlier in 1825, and left to gather dust somewhere until it was discovered, put together and first published as a fragment in 1881, the same year Brahms' second piano concerto was premièred and Béla Bartók was born. It's first two movements were complete, and that's how much of it most people ever get to hear. But there were enough of the last two movements to nearly complete them. We are pleased to have Sviatoslav Richter's nearly complete performance of this recreated work. He quits playing when the last of the real Schubert ends and where editors like Badura-Skoda have completed the work."


----------



## DavidFrankel

Just discovered D571, Sonata nº9. A lost Treasure. Sublime. Moody melody. I have the version, with all the movements completed by Martin Tirimo ( Warner)


----------



## ZeR0

I voted for 21, 20, 19, and 16. I think if I had to pick one I would go with 20.


----------



## Luchesi

DavidFrankel said:


> Just discovered D571, Sonata nº9. A lost Treasure. Sublime. Moody melody. I have the version, with all the movements completed by Martin Tirimo ( Warner)


Thanks and welcome to the forum.

"The Piano Sonata in F-sharp minor D 571, was composed by Franz Schubert in July 1817. The sonata was first published long after the composer's death in 1888 by Breitkopf & Härtel.
The sonata is incomplete, consisting of only a single movement, and even that was abandoned by the composer before completion. Other hands, such as Howard Ferguson, Noël Lee, and Martino Tirimo, have attempted to realise Schubert's assumed intentions. These hypothetical completions of the sonata have been drawn from such separately published pieces as the piece (usually assumed to be an Andante) in A major, D. 604, and the Allegro vivace in D major and Allegro in F-sharp minor, D. 570."


----------



## Eclectic Al

Do you think that floating around in the background with music there's a sense of whether you think you would like the composer or find them personally admirable (assuming you have read no biographical material about them)? I just have the sense that I would like and admire the composer of Schubert's B-flat sonata as a person more than the composer of Beethoven's Hammerklavier. Maybe it's irrational, but Schubert comes across in his music as so human. I get a sense an overwhelming sense of compassion with him. He's not my favourite composer to listen to, but the word sublime is easy to reach for with him. I just find it really hard to pin down what is so special about him, but it's there.


----------



## Luchesi

Eclectic Al said:


> Do you think that floating around in the background with music there's a sense of whether you think you would like the composer or find them personally admirable (assuming you have read no biographical material about them)? I just have the sense that I would like and admire the composer of Schubert's B-flat sonata as a person more than the composer of Beethoven's Hammerklavier. Maybe it's irrational, but Schubert comes across in his music as so human. I get a sense an overwhelming sense of compassion with him. He's not my favourite composer to listen to, but the word sublime is easy to reach for with him. I just find it really hard to pin down what is so special about him, but it's there.


I've always thought it was because he didn't have a teacher. If you play his early works with this in mind it only becomes more amazing. ..and his later works? What can be said? Where did they come from?

If you don't look at the scores they sound a little bit like Mozart/Haydn, but even then they have a fuller smoothness. He could experience the sound of the improved instruments after Mozart and Haydn?


----------



## Eclectic Al

Off topic for Piano Sonatas, but the String Quintet! Best String Quintet of all? Listen to that, and then come back to the late piano sonatas. How old was he when he died? Incredible!


----------



## Eclectic Al

Sorry, but I'm on a bit of a Schubert roll now. Is Bruckner the heir of Schubert, when it comes to symphonies at least. Again, not someone I listen to most, but there is a striving for the sublime. Schubert came closer, but Bruckner was trying. I see a line from Beethoven, to Brahms, and (whether they would like it or not) to Schoenberg and Mahler. Whereas with Bruckner, I see a line from Schubert. Nonsense, as I'm no musicologist?


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Eclectic Al said:


> Sorry, but I'm on a bit of a Schubert roll now. Is Bruckner the heir of Schubert, when it comes to symphonies at least. Again, not someone I listen to most, but there is a striving for the sublime. Schubert came closer, but Bruckner was trying. I see a line from Beethoven, to Brahms, and (whether they would like it or not) to Schoenberg and Mahler. Whereas with Bruckner, I see a line from Schubert. Nonsense, as I'm no musicologist?


I see the two compared a lot, but I personally don't hear it. Schubert builds his symphonies entirely around repetition of attractive melodies, while Bruckner has more patiently-built structures of sound in which songful lyricism is a treat rather than the norm. That's not to knock Schubert, but I found I enjoy his Great symphony much better if I just revel in the beauty of his tunes rather than focusing on how he builds up the structure, while with Bruckner I have to keep every single gesture in mind because it all contributes to the final product.


----------



## Luchesi

Eclectic Al said:


> Sorry, but I'm on a bit of a Schubert roll now. Is Bruckner the heir of Schubert, when it comes to symphonies at least. Again, not someone I listen to most, but there is a striving for the sublime. Schubert came closer, but Bruckner was trying. I see a line from Beethoven, to Brahms, and (whether they would like it or not) to Schoenberg and Mahler. Whereas with Bruckner, I see a line from Schubert. Nonsense, as I'm no musicologist?


I've been curious about what gets musicologists fascinated by dry music theory, while most people just want to listen and/or play? Sublime sounds vs the analytical rewards?

Welcome to the forum.


----------



## Eclectic Al

Perhaps for me it's just about the "heavenly length". Schubert and Bruckner were both prepared to take a long time over getting to where they wanted to reach.


----------



## hammeredklavier

Luchesi said:


> If you don't look at the scores they sound a little bit like Mozart/Haydn, but even then they have a fuller smoothness. He could experience the sound of the improved instruments after Mozart and Haydn?


I don't necessarily think the piano "improved" after Mozart and Haydn's time. For one thing, there's so much "muddiness" and "slowness" in the modern grand (the final stage the "piano transformation") that I perceive as its weaknesses. 



And no, Schubert couldn't really emulate Haydn and Mozart's sense and skill in voice-leading and thematic development. For example, I never quite hear the kind of subtle chromaticism of late Mozart in Schubert. (I'll acknowledge Schubert has his own way of expression; it just strikes me as being a bit too pleasant all the time, devoid of sophisticated control of dissonance). You should be a bit more specific when you say Schubert "has a fuller smoothness".

View attachment 131540


----------



## Luchesi

hammeredklavier said:


> I don't necessarily think the piano "improved" after Mozart and Haydn's time. For one thing, there's so much "muddiness" and "slowness" in the modern grand (the final stage the "piano transformation") that I perceive as its weaknesses.
> 
> 
> 
> And no, Schubert couldn't really emulate Haydn and Mozart's sense and skill in voice-leading and thematic development. For example, I never quite hear the kind of subtle chromaticism of late Mozart in Schubert. (I'll acknowledge Schubert has his own way of expression; it just strikes me as being a bit too pleasant all the time, devoid of sophisticated control of dissonance). You should be a bit more specific when you say Schubert "has a fuller smoothness".


I think we need to get a picture of how they were living, what their audience was, and why they were composing works. They lived far apart in time, but we forget that.


----------

