# Why are(/should) the composers of the first Viennese school (be) better than others?



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

It can't help to ask this to myself everytime I see a post like "No composer could ever beat Mozart" or "I wouldn't dare to place another composer in the same light as Beethoven". Many people (possibly even most classical music loving people) think those two and also Haydn are among the greatest composers of all time, and although of course I haven't read all the posts ever wrote on this forum but at least I have never seen someone giving arguments or a reason for why they think so, so I am actually curious. 

I mean no one is the same and everyone's different so it would be only natural that everyone has other tastes for music, so the most likely reason that all those people like them would be that everyone has their different reasons for liking them, like other things they look for in music. 
It could have been (I don't think so though) that maybe they knew a lot people and what they like to hear in music, and try to combine as many of that elements possible and balance them, which could explain why most people can listen to them, or even like them, but not why almost everyone thinks them "the best". Also it could be that, though everybody's different some people are more different than others, and which kind of people "dominates" become the "normal" people, and the music of haydn mozart and beethoven just suits more to normal people, while other composers more to outcasts? No reason I can think of seems to fit. 

They are the most well known composers though, maybe that could explain anything, for instance that some people might personally find that greatness means only who is more famous, or that they personally think one is the best if most people can at least appreciate them a bit, but if so, the beatles might be as good as them according to those?
Also it could have to do with familiarness, because everyone has heard at least one of their compositions that makes it easier to understand their personal musical language?
Another thing is that mozart and haydn have made so much works for most people there is at least one they like?

I don't know anything and by just thinking about I can't learn anything. So I better ask, I'd like to hear everyones personal thoughts about this, because I personally don't think they are necessarily the best. 
I think Mozart was maybe the greatest composer when he lived (there werent many great composers in those years though in my opinion) and I do really enjoy listening to his 20th and 24 piano concerto, 40 & 41th symphonies and many more but eve though many people think different to me he cant compare to for instance those great late-romantic composers like mahler or scriabin or sibelius or rachmaninov. Beethoven is also very great when you think of how many great innovations he created and how much he dared and without him many great composers afterwards would perhaps not be accepted or couldn't have developped their styles so Im very greatfull to him, but I personally dont connect to his music very much, except his latest compositions. 
As for Haydn, I can't say much because I frankly don't know him as well as the other two, I know many of his symphonies and string quartets but little else, and in those I find much clearness and clear homophonic harmony, simpleness which has reach a form of perfection, which are the ideals in music of classicism (totally not my own ideals though) so in that way he succeeded in being a great classicist composer. But that doesn't mean he's one of the greatest of all time. Classicism is just one of many great periods.

So as ive said already, to fans of those three or one of them: why do you personally think they are so great? just curious about other peoples opinion
and I also wonder if someone has thoughts about why so many people think they are 
(hope I don't offend anyone, I'm just curious and I could of course be stupid for not understanding something but I dont mean to offend anyone with this)


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Well, they were very good composers. I don't find it so very curious that they should be many people's favourites. I certainly shouldn't like to defend the contention that they're "the next composers ever", though (and I personally do not care much for Beethoven).

I suppose they had a particular knack for large-scale balance, melody, and the use of chromaticism in a way that sounds natural (or at least non-jarring) to many listeners.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Technically at least, there was no '1st Viennese School'. Fairly general use of the 'classical style' doesn't constitute a school. H, M and B were prominent in German music for a few decades. Of the three, only Beethoven's music was much performed between 1830 and 1900.

I gave up decades back hoping to figure out why 'so many people' think anything.

[ All three of those guys composed some really good stuff. I think so because I still enjoy it the umpteenth time I hear it.]


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Ukko said:


> Technically at least, there was no '1st Viennese School'.


H and M cribbed from one another quite a bit, B studied under H and sampled liberally from M. But you're right, that is a very loose kind of a 'school'.


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

yeah I know there wasn't really a school but this way I can cover them all three. Just Classicism wouldn't be right as there were others in that period. In the netherlands we usually call them Weense Klassieken "Viennese Classics", maybe that would be a better term?

And I think they are great composers too, and I don't wonder why they are many peoples favorites, but rather why people think they are so much better than all composers and that you can't compare prokofiev with mozart for instance


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

lupinix said:


> And I think they are great composers too, and I don't wonder why they are many peoples favorites, but rather why people think they are so much better than all composers [...]


Well, if Mozart is my favourite composer, it's hardly mysterious that I should think he's better than all other composers, is it? Perhaps I don't understand the question.


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

at balance I agree, but personally I don't feel like that that is so important in music, maybe I'm alone in that?
about natural use of melody and chromatism, they might be natural in a pure harmonic way, classical music is mostly based on harmony and clearness for as far I know and the use of chromatism sounds harmonicly because it mostly circles around 
but overal I don't know if I find constant strict V-I progressions and things like that so natural, it can be nice so raise a certain tension at a certain moment in for instance early baroque music, but if it happens all the time to me it begins to sound rather cold and fake than natural, and the whole becomes either boring or irritating
of course there are many great classicistic pieces which I like and do find sincere and it may be just that it isn't my taste, Id like to find that out by reading the opinions of others
(also many popular music is very harmonicly based but I believe many people that listen to classical music look down upon popular music)
maybe I should also have mentioned the real question I have, whether its an emotional or spiritual or technical or amusemental thing why many people like them, I justy would like hear their personal experiences with those composers


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

ahammel said:


> Well, if Mozart is my favourite composer, it's hardly mysterious that I should think he's better than all other composers, is it? Perhaps I don't understand the question.


yeah of course, but to some it sounds almost like you may not even say you think another composer better, or at least I feel so
maybe they don't mean it that way though
I just thought it be nice if anyone can say what they think without being afraid of people not liking them for it
maybe thats even more the reason I started this threat, to find out if people mean it that way


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

lupinix said:


> yeah of course, but to some it sounds almost like you may not even say you think another composer better, or at least I feel so


If there are people who think that you're not allowed to say that other composers are better than those three, I don't think I care about their approval.


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

you might be right maybe I should remove this thread


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

There was anti-Mozart campaign on TC at some point and many supported it, freely admitting they find him uninteresting or claiming he is largely overrated. He's certainly no sacred cow, Haydn as well.


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

I see, well guess I was a bit stupid making this threat


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

I see, well guess I was a bit stupid making this threat 
is there a way to completely delete it? 
or change it to a poll-threat because I do have a kind off idea for that?
at least if no one mind me change it


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

^^^^

Nothing to worry about, it´s a perfectly legitimate thread, IMO.


----------



## samurai (Apr 22, 2011)

lupinix said:


> I see, well guess I was a bit stupid making this threat


As long as it's a thread--and not a threat--that you're making, all's forgiven, I'm sure! :scold:


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

haha yeah *thread


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

The 1st VS set the standards to which all followed or aimed to exceed. If it wasn't for the 1st VS, we wouldn't even be here discussing music much at all.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Music development would have been different if Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven had not existed, but it would surely have happened.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

You can buy a bottle of thread remover at your local Walmart and if across the pond at your local Harrod's.


----------



## Yardrax (Apr 29, 2013)

hpowders said:


> You can buy a bottle of thread remover at your local Walmart and if across the pond at your local Harrod's.


I don't have a local Harrods because I don't live in London...


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Yardrax said:


> I don't have a local Harrods because I don't live in London...


Ahhhh.....perhaps Amazon.com. They are everywhere!!! 

Actually, that post was intended for the OP since he was thinking of how he could remove this thread!!


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*I Don't Know*

Simple answer to the OP.

I don't know.

Based on my experiences as an amateur musician I think one can make a strong case that Mozart and Haydn were the best composers of the classical period. To say they are superior to all of the composers who came before and after? I don't know.

Is atonal music better that Mozart or vice versa? Again, I do not know. It is different.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

I think because they appeal to both the head AND the heart.
Not just one or the other.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

The reason that any artist is recognized as being canonical is that he or she continues to be recognized as such by those whose opinions matter most... those who have invested the most time and effort (etc...) in the appreciation, preservation, etc... of the art form in question. Among those whose opinions matter most we would have to include "experts" (such as historians, critics... in music, performers, conductors, etc...), subsequent generations of artists, and generations of art lovers. Essentially, Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn and others are recognized as being among the most important ("greatest"?) composers ever due to the collective opinion of those whose opinions hold the most weight.

Why are Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn, etc... included among these most revered composers? Honestly, this would take far too much time and effort to go into here... and you might far more easily just read any encyclopedia entry upon the composers in question in order to gain some insight into why these composers are so highly regarded.

I mean no one is the same and everyone's different so it would be only natural that everyone has other tastes for music, so the most likely reason that all those people like them would be that everyone has their different reasons for liking them, like other things they look for in music.

This is certainly one reason for the respect afforded composers such as Mozart and Beethoven: Breadth. Their music is broad enough in genre and even style so that almost any music lover can find something they love among their music. Those who fail to appreciate Beethoven's thornier string quartets may find they love the lyrical 6th symphony or any number of his piano sonatas. Those who struggle with opera can turn to Mozart's clarinet quintet, his piano sonatas, etc... Those who find Haydn's quartets or symphonies overwhelming, may turn to his choral masterworks.

Personally, my favorite composer is J.S. Bach, and "breadth" is one of his greatest strengths as well. Ultimately, however, why a composer or given group of composers rate among my favorites has little to do with the collective opinion of others or the historical innovation of their work... rather it comes down to just which composers have given me the most pleasure... and yes this comes down to both the breadth and depth of the work... the ability of the work to inspire a profound emotional, intellectual, or spiritual response... the ability of the work to challenge me... to never strike me a s fully exhausted but rather to hold my attention again and again and again. These, among other things, are among the reasons that Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Wagner, Schubert, Richard Strauss, Handel, Brahms, etc... are among my favorite composers.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

arpeggio said:


> Simple answer to the OP.
> 
> I don't know.
> 
> ...


The lovely "I don't know." Fresh, honest, open, and highly underrated.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hpowders said:


> You can buy a bottle of thread remover at your local Walmart and if across the pond at your local Harrod's.


Amazon has several possibilities.

http://www.amazon.com/Tacony-Seam-R...qid=1389837211&sr=8-6&keywords=thread+remover


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Amazon has several possibilities.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Tacony-Seam-R...qid=1389837211&sr=8-6&keywords=thread+remover


As good a thread remover as any!


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I was thinking about making a thread like this. Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven (and Bach) were certainly among the best composers of their time. I think people rate them the best out of all because the style in which they wrote tends to be the kind of style people gravitate towards. I think there are plenty of other composers who are equally great, but in a different style and time period.

I would place Machaut, Monteverdi, Stravinsky, Debussy, Schoenberg (probably Handel if I knew more of his music) and a few others on equal footing with guys like Bach, Mozart and Beethoven in their own respective styles and time periods.


----------



## lupinix (Jan 9, 2014)

Itullian said:


> I think because they appeal to both the head AND the heart.
> Not just one or the other.


still don't know what appealing to the head means? You mean it is clear and structured? Or that it is interesting to listen to?
Or that it is nice to analyse their pieces as well as listening to them, or that they are easy to analyse?



violadude said:


> I was thinking about making a thread like this. Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven (and Bach) were certainly among the best composers of their time. I think people rate them the best out of all because the style in which they wrote tends to be the kind of style people gravitate towards. I think there are plenty of other composers who are equally great, but in a different style and time period.
> 
> I would place Machaut, Monteverdi, Stravinsky, Debussy, Schoenberg (probably Handel if I knew more of his music) and a few others on equal footing with guys like Bach, Mozart and Beethoven in their own respective styles and time periods.


Yeah that might well be the case. Its just very hard to compare composers of different eras because the focus was on different things.

I have a friend who recently told me at first he didn't like chopin (Its hard for me to imagine not liking chopin, even most of my other friends, which don't like nearly all classical music, did like at least something by chopin) or beethoven at all because he used to listen only to baroque and rock and maybe a bit shostakovich and was expecting more bachlike things or something like that when exploring other classical composers. 
I guess Im the opposite in some ways, as I always look for something I miss in the music I know, which was one of the reasons chopin was the first classical composer I really liked, even though I knew some things by bach beethoven and mozart


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

lupinix said:


> I have a friend who recently told me at first he didn't like chopin (Its hard for me to imagine not liking chopin, even most of my other friends, which don't like nearly all classical music, did like at least something by chopin)


I consider Chopin a pretty difficult composer to appreciate, actually. I took me a long time to come around to him.

There's music that's difficult because of the complexity (like late Bach), and music that's difficult because it's radically different from what the listener has come to expect (like Schoenberg), and then there's music that's difficult because the the style is so simple and pared-down. Mozart gets a bit like that as well, in some works.


----------

