# Was the classical period largely monotomous?



## Schoenberg (Oct 15, 2018)

If you look at all other periods of classical music, from the Baroque music and Renaissance music that preceded it and as well the Romantic and "Modern music" that succeeded it, one thing that has become apparent to me is that while these periods of music had many schools of composition, from the various styles of music in the baroque period to the "conservatives" and the "new German" schools of music in the Romantic period, and of course the many schools of composition that have existed since, there isn't much variety in the classical period. As a result of this, many consider there to be only a few composers from the classical period worth listening to. This raises a few questions. Why/how did classical music converge into a single school of composition in the classical period, and why/how did it get split into many school of composition in the periods that followed?

Or have I just missed something in this judgement, were there in fact other "schools" of composition in the classical period other than the one that Hadyn, Mozart, and to an extent Beethoven subscribed to?


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

From roughly 1750 to 1820, artists, architects, and musicians moved away from the heavily ornamented styles of the Baroque and the Rococo, and instead embraced a clean, uncluttered style they thought reminiscent of Classical Greece. The newly established aristocracies were replacing monarchs and the church as patrons of the arts, and were demanding an impersonal, but tuneful and elegant music. Dances such as the minuet and the gavotte were provided in the forms of entertaining serenades and divertimenti.

_At this time the Austrian capital of Vienna became the musical center of Europe, and works of the period are often referred to as being in the Viennese style. Composers came from all over Europe to train in and around Vienna, and gradually they developed and formalized the standard musical forms that were to predominate European musical culture for the next several decades._ A reform of the extravagance of Baroque opera was undertaken by Christoph von Gluck. Johann Stamitz contributed greatly to the growth of the orchestra and developed the idea of the orchestral symphony. The Classical period reached its majestic culmination with the masterful symphonies, sonatas, and string quartets by the three great composers of the Viennese school: Franz Joseph Haydn, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, and Ludwig van Beethoven.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classicism


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Yes, the classical period was largely monogamous. I have heard of no exceptions, at least in Europe. I suspect things were different elsewhere.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Yes, I know it's just a typo, but I learned a new word today.

Definition of monotomous (obsolete): having a distinct cleavage in one direction only —used of a mineral


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

KenOC said:


> Yes, the classical period was largely monogamous. I have heard of no exceptions, at least in Europe. I suspect things were different elsewhere.


....unless you want to start a research project into Composers of Salt Lake City pre-1800? I suspect it'd be a relatively short thesis.:angel:


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2019)

I think it's probably correct that once we get into the mid to late "classical" era proper, circa 1750-1820, there was not a lot of variation in the basic style. There was, however, quite a long run-in period from around 1700-1750 with earlier forms of classical, like rococo, galante, taking off in various places in competition with baroque.

I guess that one reason for this general lack of variation is because the main "classical" era was relatively short, only some 70 years. By contrast the baroque era was over twice that legth from around 1600 to 1750 before it finally died out.

Another possible factor is that the main classical era was dominated heavily by just 3 composers, Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven, so much so that they largely "crowded out" other schools from developing. Mozart largely followed Haydn in broad style and coverage, and Beethoven followed both, adding his own twists and twiddles, thus giving rise to a fairly homogenous appearance to the entire period. 

In respect of the following "romantic" era from around 1820-ish, it wasn't long before differences in approach began to appear, which later became quite disputatious between rival schools as regards which was the better approach.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> Definition of monotomous (obsolete): having a distinct cleavage in one direction only . . .


Watch it, now. This is a family forum.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Pretty much all your excellent points, arguments, opinions, ideas, ,,you have plagiarized my CONTANT NAGGING POSTS PAST # WEEKS,,,you stand accused,,,
Oh all right blame it as synchronicity .

No serious,,, pretty much what you just discovered, I made these enlightened views beginning some weeks back.
I said *The classical era was Mozart and the rapid quick short lived zenith to this phenomenon was Mozarts late, mature works, the scaed music, final operas, last syms, last PC's,,,the along came Beethoven's 4th,a gem of a classical symphony, but not to equal Mozart's last great symphonies*. AS quick as it rose,,it was gone, pofff.
The baroque was 
Corelli
Handel

Vivaldi
Bach


Came and went,,,pofff gone.


The romantic era, the Schuman pc is always paired with the Chopin. They are very similar. Or else the great Grieg is paired with the Schumann, they have that same lush romantic sound.


Schubert's solo piano can be heard as Beethoven-ique. Chopin has passages which have that unique geramnic sound, in fact that entire romantic, post Beethoven period is *Germanic sounding*, Dvorak, The Russians had their own spirit, Rimsky, Borodin, Mussorgsky. 
Quite different, yet all can be easily group as the *Russian romantic sound*… Now we come to 
The Modern Era. 

Defies any sort of cataloguing, 
Each composer stands uniquely different, with only shades of *borrowing*. 
Szymanowski can indeed be said to hold Chopinesque tones, textures. Scriabin can also be heard as Chopinesque. 
Stilll I find both to be separated from the great master, so as to be unique .

Wagner in his eraly opears was under that Germanic tonal structures, initiated by Beethoven, these early operas I do not care for. Parsifal set a new direction. 
Varese seta new direct. 
I don't care for anything from Stravinsky, but he too was instrumental for establsihinh new sounds. Debussy has already been mentioned often as the genitor of The New Musical Sounds. 
The 3 great 2nd Viennese masters, came to teach many who would follow. 

Karl Hartman established his ideas for Henze to pick up on. 



As you correctly, succinctly reveal, the Modern Era is unique, profound, has depth, breath, width, heights, colors, textures, chromatic brilliance, tonal structures, never before match, nor equaled by any previous movements in calssiacl music. 
Not even close in the scales of magnificence and creativity as is expressed in the Modernist Period of Classical Music. 

I've tried desperately to get others to understand and grasp what I was saying. 
So glad you have made this OP, as it gives support to my arguments, yet in a way that clarifies and substantiate solidly these conjectures, as facts. facts which the romantic/classicists crowds are adamant to deny, and make vain attempts to refute. 

It is so plain and obvious to see and hear what you and I can perceive in any given comparison of the previous eras to The Modern Era. 


Why be so incredulous and the evidence is so in front of their faces? 

Of course the trad is so chisled in stone over at the Concertgebouw, Vienna, London, Berlin temples to their gods,,,,these things can not be seen , just yet, Will take another 100 years to make any significant , well over due adjustments to this rigged INDUSTRY. Incorporated. 
Just ridiculous the music INDUSTRY.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Schoenberg said:


> Or have I just missed something in this judgement, were there in fact other "schools" of composition in the classical period other than the one that Hadyn, Mozart, and to an extent Beethoven subscribed to?


Yes, there were 'other schools'. Composers in Northern Germany pursued a different style from the more 'Italian' Style Galante:
empfindsamer Stil. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_style
The leading composers were Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, Carl Friedrich Abel etc. 
CPE Bach flute concerto WQ22: 




Johann Nepomuk Hummel was already composing in the concerto style (that people often attribute to Chopin) as early as 1810s.








Larkenfield said:


> The newly established aristocracies were replacing monarchs and the church as patrons of the arts, and were demanding an impersonal, but tuneful and elegant music. Dances such as the minuet and the gavotte were provided in the forms of entertaining serenades and divertimenti.


But then 19th century composers composed for the ballroom and salon. Are they any different from the 18th century examples? As I noted in another thread, there are passages in Chopin's Waltzes that are remarkably similar. 
Take for example the beginnings of Grande Valse Brillante in E flat major (*0:00*) and Valse Op. Post in E minor (*40:23*), 
and the bravura passages of Op.34 No.1 in A flat major (*5:15*) and Op.42 in A flat major (*18:02*).


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Oh I forgot to bring in Bruckner and Mahler,,,,how could I forget?
Is there anything in either, that is not represented in better form in other composers from that era?
Bruckner hasthe 2 incredible codas , 7th symphony, 1st/4th movements. 
But are willing to patiently wait for 2 codas in a hour + long symphony, for a full 5 minutes of gripping orchestration?
Mahler has plenty of places where only a few orchestra members are doodling around,,while the others take a nice long rest. 
Could not Mahler have written symphonies where all the orchestra is kept busy, and this way condense his works to under one hour?
Don't believe, go look for yourself,. At least Bruckner has the orchestra with more movement going on,,Mahler 's orchestras just have it way too easy , making his works , dull and aimlessly drifting who knows where off to.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

The def on 
Monotonous
surely befits the classical music pre Modern Era,, at least to my ears it does.,,some 35 years now.

https://www.google.com/search?sourc...iz.....0..0j0i131..11:1j12:7j13:0.f__dhl-mY44

Schoenberg could not have chose a more concise, catch all term for a correct descript


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

paulbest said:


> Oh I forgot to bring in Bruckner and Mahler,,,,how could I forget?


Just an idea: how about sticking to the subject of the thread you're posting in, rather than posting the same things over and over in every thread you take part in?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Art Rock said:


> Yes, I know it's just a typo, but I learned a new word today.
> 
> Definition of monotomous (obsolete): having a distinct cleavage in one direction only -used of a mineral


Well, I'm going with it: the classical period was like a piece of asbestos or micah: once you start peeling back the layers, and it begins to flake off, you see that there's no hidden layers; it's all made of the same stuff.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Schoenberg said:


> If you look at all other periods of classical music, from the Baroque music and Renaissance music that preceded it and as well the Romantic and "Modern music" that succeeded it, one thing that has become apparent to me is that while these periods of music had many schools of composition, from the various styles of music in the baroque period to the "conservatives" and the "new German" schools of music in the Romantic period, and of course the many schools of composition that have existed since, there isn't much variety in the classical period. As a result of this, many consider there to be only a few composers from the classical period worth listening to. This raises a few questions. Why/how did classical music converge into a single school of composition in the classical period, and why/how did it get split into many school of composition in the periods that followed?
> 
> Or have I just missed something in this judgement, were there in fact other "schools" of composition in the classical period other than the one that Hadyn, Mozart, and to an extent Beethoven subscribed to?


OK, I stand corrected,,,My posts were wayyyy offff track. 
No, there were Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven = The Classiacl Era.
Romantic era = 10's
Modern era, 100's

Seems to be a progession. 
Look at every art,

Homes designed back 100 yrs ago were crummy,,surea few in Europe and the USA, but the vast majority of homes designed = art, were horrific.

Man progresses, he builds on what came before.

This is the nature of art.

Could you imagine Ravel writing music back in the early 1800's? He may have written great music, but nothing like he did early 1900's. 
Now we come to the late modern era. 
The End.
Sure I am taking liberty at expanding the OP. Why not, that's what these topics are all about, expansion. Seeing things wider, deeper. 
Hopefully I did now make a contribution to the OP topic, hopefully to Art Rock's satisfaction.

The OP Q is, was there other forms in the classical era, other than just 3 main composers, No , that was the whole pie..And like Millionrainbows accurate comments, peel Beethoven's symphonies any way you like, they are all the same. 
Haydn's cake, is plain white cake with white frosting. = Bland.

It is the modern /late modern era which is the crown jewel in classical music. But we need to pick the chaff out from the wheat, 
out goes Stockhausen, off to the chaff pile.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

The music may seem monotonous to the OP, but it's _homogeneous_ to me. Big difference even if there is a certain similarity of vocabulary between composers. The music is elegant, free of emotionalism and bloat, streamlined, balanced in form and content, sophisticated, and no two composers within the classical tera sound exactly alike except perhaps superficially on the surface for those who are not paying sufficient attention. Haydn does not sound like Mozart even though there are similarities. This becomes apparent when one spends more time with Haydn. So the keyword is _homogeneous_ which suggests a certain similarity of approach to composing. This music is highly refined, but sometimes even demonic, and beautifully constructed in form. Rather than being polyphonic like in the Baroque era, the music became more _homophonic_ and classical with regard to the Greek ideals and concept of beauty. It was a very important era that greatly influenced the Romantics who came after them, one example being Mozart's great influence on Chopin. Wagner esteemed Mozart and so did Tchaikovsky and many others almost too numerous to mention. And they were more names important during this period than Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. Despite being a relatively short period of time, at least compared to other eras, it left an indelible impression on music: http://www.spiritsound.com/music/mozartquotes.html


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Well every great composer saw what Mozart accomplished, and these masterworks , before the age of 35. 
They all stood stunned, how is this possible? 
Mozart 's genius was recognized by every composer, as quite different from all others. In a short time he out composed many living 2x's his age. How was this possible is the Q they asked themselves, Thus he was given his high status among every composer. 

I am listening to Bruckner's 2nd symphony,. I can hear influences from Beethoven, but also from Mozart. 
Mozart and Beethoven, the 2 most influential composers in history. 
Both make up the Classical Era. 
Haydn is a footnote.


----------

