# Beethoven Piano Sonatas



## Guest (Feb 25, 2018)

I've just finished the *Curtis Institute of Music* online course on the Beethoven Piano Sonatas and the lectures of Jonathan Biss. My lifetime love of these works is only further enhanced by this excellent course and it is highly recommended. Biss says something which crystallizes everything I've always believed/felt about Mozart: that successive generations of composers never felt that Mozart was a composer who had to be 'grappled with'. Admired, yes, but Mozart never really stepped outside the classical conventions of his time. So, Beethoven had to be 'grappled with' and his piano sonatas irrevocably changed the musical landscape. That's why my love has always been directed towards Beethoven and why Mozart bores me, essentially.

I found myself having my own long-time views reinforced during this excellent course and that was very gratifying. And also that I believed Schubert would have been the equal of Beethoven had that young composer survived; I have long thought that. Biss says the year 1828 - the one after Beethoven's death - was arguably the greatest compositional *yea*r in the history of music and he identifies those last great masterworks of Schubert. And Schubert could and did grapple with Beethoven whilst bringing his own inimitable 'voice' to the fore. Wonderful stuff.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

And yet, interestingly, I've seen so many shallow performances of Mozart, where the performer adopts a sappy grin and a cheap la-la sigh, and breezes through the most profound and subtle music, without ever really _getting _it...


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I think listeners perception of music differs, for example some people are naturally drawn to Beethoven's compositional style - therefore it is not really an issue of them 'grappling' with his music. Likewise some people are more drawn to the music of Mozart.

I can agree that Mozart _was_ more conventional in some ways, but on the other hand seems more naturally unique than Beethoven in others. For example Beethoven experimented more and pushed more boundaries with form, but I think to create his own individual voice as a composer he _had_ to be innovative in these ways because he did not have as unique of a natural compositional voice as Mozart. In other words if Beethoven was not bold and innovative in his use of form, there is not much to distinguish his harmonic language from a composer like Haydn. Where despite his more conventional use of form I don't hear any composers in the entire Classical era before or after Mozart that sound like him.

The ironic thing is that I think perhaps people who feel that Mozart doesn't need to be grappled with and that he is boring, don't really grasp his music.


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2018)

tdc said:


> I think listeners perception of music differs, for example some people are naturally drawn to Beethoven's compositional style - therefore it is not really an issue of them 'grappling' with his music. Likewise some people are more drawn to the music of Mozart.
> 
> I can agree that Mozart _was_ more conventional in some ways, but on the other hand seems more naturally unique than Beethoven in others. For example Beethoven experimented more and pushed more boundaries with form, but I think to create his own individual voice as a composer he _had_ to be innovative in these ways because he did not have as unique of a natural compositional voice as Mozart. In other words if Beethoven was not bold and innovative in his use of form, there is not much to distinguish his harmonic language from a composer like Haydn. Where despite his more conventional use of form I don't hear any composers in the entire Classical era before or after Mozart that sound like him.
> 
> The ironic thing is that I think perhaps people who feel that Mozart doesn't need to be grappled with and that he is boring, don't really grasp his music.


I do 'grasp' Mozart's music; the grasping was too easy for me. That's the problem. And Beethoven composed differently; you're right that it didn't come as 'easily' as it did to Mozart - but that always sounds obvious to me with the latter whenever I hear it. Much of it has a sameness, a sweetness - some people think of that as profundity. I do not. With Beethoven you seldom hear the same thing twice. But, as you say, it's a matter of taste. I'm just glad a music professor shares mine, and my ideas that go along with it. A nice feeling.


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2018)

Kieran said:


> And yet, interestingly, I've seen so many shallow performances of Mozart, where the performer adopts a sappy grin and a cheap la-la sigh, and breezes through the most profound and subtle music, without ever really _getting _it...


I disagree that Mozart's is THE most profound music - or the most subtle. These words are often over-wrought to describe music (I refer mostly to the sonatas and piano concertos and NOT to the chamber music) which essentially sounds the same. In a different key.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I also audited the Biss lectures on the sonatas; they're available on Coursera. But there's a lot more depth and insight, IMO, in the lectures Andras Schiff gave a decade or so ago, speaking from the keyboard. Every sonata gets a lecture, usually 30-45 minutes in length (the Hammerklavier gets two!)

Lots of material, and the site encourages downloading for listening at leisure. Anybody who loves Beethoven's music will love these.

https://wigmore-hall.org.uk/podcasts/andras-schiff-beethoven-lecture-recitals


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2018)

This is just staggering sonata amongst a field of contenders in Beethoven's oeuvre which are already at a phenomenally high level:
There are two separate performances here for comparative purposes, with excellent accompanying notes:






And it brings me to tears just to think how that young master Schubert absolutely came to terms with these great works. "Grappling with" and 'coming to terms' - you just don't hear that with any other composer until Schoenberg, I guess.


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2018)

KenOC said:


> I also audited the Biss lectures on the sonatas; they're available on Coursera. But there's a lot more depth and insight, IMO, in the lectures Andras Schiff gave a decade or so ago, speaking from the keyboard. Every sonata gets a lecture, usually 30-45 minutes in length (the Hammerklaver gets two!)
> 
> Lots of material, and the site encourages downloading for listening at leisure. Anybody who loves Beethoven's music will love these.
> 
> https://wigmore-hall.org.uk/podcasts/andras-schiff-beethoven-lecture-recitals


Yes, I've heard all those by maestro Schiff. I wasn't as moved as I was by the Biss lectures as these were essentially for musicians whereas the Schiff was not. Put it this way; if you had no musical training you would have struggled with the Biss in a way you wouldn't with Schiff. And, of course, Biss had to truncate this analysis because of course/time constraints. I still think they're better. I want to be addressed as though I already have some knowledge and insight myself.


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2018)

Compare *the last movement of Op. 109 by Beethoven*, which I posted above and its last movement which includes a Fugato in Variation 5 with this final sonata by Mozart!!






Beethoven's work sounds "orchestral" in conception, whereas the Mozart is singular and already quite familiar with the rest of his sonata output. Nothing new to be heard here.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Christabel said:


> I've just finished the *Curtis Institute of Music* online course on the Beethoven Piano Sonatas and the lectures of Jonathan Biss.


That was a fun course. I could feel his enthusiasm for these pieces. I'm taking the class on the blues, and it's a little harder to get through because the instructor, while well educated and informative, doesn't convey the same passion.


----------



## Guest (Feb 25, 2018)

Manxfeeder said:


> That was a fun course. I could feel his enthusiasm for these pieces. I'm taking the class on the blues, and it's a little harder to get through because the instructor, while well educated and informative, doesn't convey the same passion.


How wonderful is the internet that these things - as well as other great discussions on u-Tube generally - are so readily accessible!!! I've just been listening to Kempff playing the Schubert Sonata D958 and this just wouldn't have been possible without Beethoven! That final circa 12 minute movement where he invokes Haydn with a very Austrian 'anthem' but then cannot help Beethoven coming in through the door to push the melody to its absolute limits. You can hear Schubert working out where to go next; he paints himself into a corner and then, voila!, a Coda to gloriously end the proceedings. But of course, you darling composer!!


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2018)

I you go to the Stretto aat 38:44 in the final movement of the "*Hammerklavier"* I defy anybody to find a more devastating section in any piano sonata at any time. There just isn't anything which comes within a bull's roar!! This is not only a profoundly gifted musical intelligence but one of the greatest minds in human history:


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Christabel said:


> I you go to the Stretto aat 38:44 in the final movement of the "*Hammerklavier"* I defy anybody to find a more devastating section in any piano sonata at any time. There just isn't anything which comes within a bull's roar!! This is not only a profoundly gifted musical intelligence but one of the greatest minds in human history:


I'll nominate the Prokofiev 6 for that challenge. Starting around 23:15.






Beethoven was great, but he wasn't the only one.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

KenOC said:


> I also audited the Biss lectures on the sonatas; they're available on Coursera. But there's a lot more depth and insight, IMO, in the lectures Andras Schiff gave a decade or so ago, speaking from the keyboard. Every sonata gets a lecture, usually 30-45 minutes in length (the Hammerklavier gets two!)
> 
> Lots of material, and the site encourages downloading for listening at leisure. Anybody who loves Beethoven's music will love these.
> 
> https://wigmore-hall.org.uk/podcasts/andras-schiff-beethoven-lecture-recitals


I have the Schiff lectures on my PC and mp3 player and put onto CD they are a gold mine.


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2018)

Phil loves classical said:


> I'll nominate the Prokofiev 6 for that challenge. Starting around 23:15.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I love Prokofiev - he was an absolutely fabulous composer. But he wasn't consistently as magnificent across the genres (except opera) as Beethoven was. A bit like saying Einstein was a genius but he wasn't the only one.


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2018)

I'll go further. Beethoven's achievements were of a different order of magnitude to the vast vast majority of composers. And he was deaf; never forget that.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Christabel said:


> But he wasn't consistently as magnificent across the genres (except opera) as Beethoven was.


Or - dare we say it - as Mozart (including opera, and all the other forms available to him).

The Bliss course sounds fascinating but it seems that, rather than challenge your perceptions, it only confirmed them. I'd much rather Artur Schnabel's assessment, that "the sonatas of Mozart are unique; they are too easy for children, and too difficult for artists."

As for Luigi's deafness, it's inspiring that he composed such loud and popular works which he tragically never got to hear, but bear in mind that he didn't go fully deaf until an age much later than Mozart was when he died.

It's possible to compose music when you're deaf. Being dead makes it more problematical...


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Mozart did more than any other Composer to creat the Classicist Model of the Piano Sonata. I don’t know how he can be criticized for not defying the conventions of a genre that he himself created


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Triplets said:


> Mozart did more than any other Composer to creat the Classicist Model of the Piano Sonata. I don't know how he can be criticized for not defying the conventions of a genre that he himself created


Remember, the design of a piano sonata is exactly like that of a string quartet or symphony in this era, except for the likelihood of a fourth, dance or scherzo, movement. What exactly did Mozart contribute in creating this model? All of the forms were well known and well used by the time he composed any mature sonatas - by hundreds of composers.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

Christabel said:


> I you go to the Stretto aat 38:44 in the final movement of the "*Hammerklavier"* I defy anybody to find a more devastating section in any piano sonata at any time. There just isn't anything which comes within a bull's roar!! This is not only a profoundly gifted musical intelligence but one of the greatest minds in human history:


Depends on what you mean with "devastating section"? technically difficult to play and at the same time being of high quality? if so, there are several pieces I find with more devastating sections in the regard than the Hammerklavier section you mention, for example in Liszt's Piano Sonata in B minor, Etude No. 5 (Feux follets), Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit, Chopin's Etude #4 op.10, Ballada #2, Prelude #16, Rachmaninov's Etude Tableaux No. 6 op.39, etc.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

Christabel said:


> I'll go further. Beethoven's achievements were of a different order of magnitude to the vast vast majority of composers. And he was deaf; never forget that.


So were Mozart's achievements. And he achieved it dying *22* years younger than Beethoven did; never forget that.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

jdec said:


> Depends on what you mean with "devasting section"? technically difficult to play and at the same time being of high quality?


I took his remark to mean that it was emotionally devastating.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> I took his remark to mean that it was emotionally devastating.


Then I can think of many more, including in Beethoven's own output.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Bulldog said:


> I took his remark to mean that it was emotionally devastating.


Perhaps* devastating* was not the best description ...


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2018)

Triplets said:


> Mozart did more than any other Composer to creat the Classicist Model of the Piano Sonata. I don't know how he can be criticized for not defying the conventions of a genre that he himself created


I don't believe criticism is the right word; he just never developed the sonata form in the way Beethoven did, instead remaining in the model as Haydn mostly did. But I think you can already hear in many of those works of classical structural perfection the 'problem' which Beethoven was trying to solve; they become tiring to listen to - too much consonance, frilly notes, too much of the same thing. Beethoven's works evolved at every stage. By the time he was 30 he was entering a 'heroic phase' from which he was to burst out only a few years later. And his composing demonstrated the limits of the piano and his frustration with it at the time. I love Haydn, too, by the way; a truly great composer whom I actually prefer to Mozart. But the latter's operas are in a mould all of their own; truly superb - lest there by any impression I don't admire Mozart. His piano music and concerti for that instrument bore me, that's all. Am I allowed to say that in the age of micro-aggressions, safe spaces, political correctness and other tools of censorship?

And if anybody regards Beethoven's music as "loud" they are missing the point. Completely.


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2018)

Dan Ante said:


> Perhaps* devastating* was not the best description ...


I meant emotionally devastating; bringing the listener to the knees, drop-dead gorgeous. And technically difficult too, yes, but of course he wasn't alone in this respect (as has been pointed out) but also so much much more. IMO. It's absolutely wonderful that we have this music, on the internet and at a fingertips AND can talk about it. I need to. Absolutely.


----------



## Guest (Feb 26, 2018)

jdec said:


> Then I can think of many more, including in Beethoven's own output.


I'm with you there. Three cheers for the deaf guy.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Christabel said:


> His piano music and concerti for that instrument bore me, that's all.


Then I can't tell from the content of your posts, are you too easily bored, or too easily impressed?

I once heard a Beethoven piano sonata performed in the vaults of St Peter's Church in Vienna. I was staying close by, traveling to hear a couple of Mozart operas. The Beethoven gig was a reasonably priced diversion on an evening where there was no opera.

I think you'd like Vienna, I don't know have you been. Perhaps you've even lived there. Well worth a visit...


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

Is it cool to like the sonatas of Beethoven, Mozart, Schubert, Haydn, and Handel? I do.

Beethoven will always be my favourite overall composer but I greatly enjoy the others also. No I don't find Mozart boring, I find him more formal and flowery at times, but it works.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Christabel said:


> * I meant emotionally devastating; bringing the listener to the knees, drop-dead gorgeous.* And technically difficult too, yes, but of course he wasn't alone in this respect (as has been pointed out) but also so much much more. IMO. It's absolutely wonderful that we have this music, on the internet and at a fingertips AND can talk about it. I need to. Absolutely.


I find Mozart stronger in that category, actually. The Commendatore scene in Don Giovanni was as emotionally wrecking as anything Beethoven wrote, plus he did it first (used to great effect, with polite clapping at the end , in the movie Amadeus, a highlight in Cinema history to me). Piano Concerto No 23, 27 are emotionally charged and developed way beyond anything written up to that time, by Bach, Haydn, or anyone (at least to me of course, emotion could be a subjective thing). Beethoven to me takes it over the top to some, including me, described as a caricature I've heard before. Walter claimed he only understood and loved Mozart's music at an old age, although he has performed it since his youth.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

That's a great point, Phil, and one I've seen made many times by musicians: that it's only after they doused themselves in all the wild innovations and histrionics and egoism of the Romantics, that they returned to Mozart with a renewed wonder and appreciation for what they'd actually missed first time around, which is the depth, that troubled soul beneath the surface sheen, and of course, the peerless taste and Beauty, with a capital B, which is something we find we need, as we get older and deepen in life...


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Kieran said:


> That's a great point, Phil, and one I've seen made many times by musicians: that it's only after they doused themselves in all the wild innovations and histrionics and egoism of the Romantics, that they returned to Mozart with a renewed wonder and appreciation for what they'd actually missed first time around, which is the depth, that troubled soul beneath the surface sheen, and of course, the peerless taste and Beauty, with a capital B, which is something we find we need, as we get older and deepen in life...


I will have to give WAM another listening


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Dan Ante said:


> I will have to give WAM another listening


It'll last a lifetime, hopefully!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I have always found Mozart's piano sonatas pretty much uninteresting, preferring Haydn's. But a recent set of sonatas played by Fazil Say really holds my attention.


----------



## Guest (Mar 1, 2018)

Yesterday I had a long talk with a friend who holds a PhD in Ethnomusicology. We were walking together and started talking about Beethoven, Haydn and Mozart. He agreed with my sentiments about Mozart and said "he was a theatrical composer" - which is a position I've held for some decades. Anyway, we both said neither of us had many recordings of works by Mozart, apart from some operas. I told him "Beethoven speaks in the singular genius of the individual human mind on a par with Pythagoras, Einstein, Newton et al". His reply, "yes, of course, and that's what I've always told my children".


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

Christabel said:


> Yesterday I had a long talk with *a friend who holds a PhD in Ethnomusicology.* We were walking together and started talking about Beethoven, Haydn and Mozart. *He agreed with my sentiments about Mozart and said "he was a theatrical composer" *- which is a position I've held for some decades. Anyway, we both said neither of us had many recordings of works by Mozart, apart from some operas. I told him "Beethoven speaks in the singular genius of the individual human mind on a par with Pythagoras, Einstein, Newton et al". His reply, "yes, of course, and that's what I've always told my children".


Even though Mozart wrote:

41 symphonies
27 piano concertos
4 horn concertos
A clarinet concerto
An oboe concerto
A flute concerto
A flute & harp concerto
5 violin concertos
18 masses
Many other sacred works
13 serenades
20 Divertimentos
23 String Quartets
6 String Quintets
21 Violin Sonatas
6 Piano Trios
18 piano sonatas
4 flute quartets
Piano quartets
Piano quintet
Duos for piano and other instruments
+various of other material​
With respect to your Ph D friend, I'm afraid that Ph D's are two a penny. Much depends on where they are obtained from. In any case, it's only someone's opinion, Ph D or not.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Kieran said:


> It'll last a lifetime, hopefully!


Sorry to say after a couple of nights listening to them, I can listen to WAMs St Qts no problem but they just don't grab me I have grown out of them much preferring Beethoven, Shostakovich etc.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Ethnomusicology emphasizes non-western music or music outside music of the European tradition so an Ethnomusicology Phd does doesn't confer special expertise about Mozart vs. Beethoven. In fact, a musicology degree doesn't confer a special expertise on the qualitative position of Mozart vs. Beethoven (i.e. outside of an analysis of the music or evaluation of objective evidence about how these composers are viewed by experts and the public).


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

When a Phd starts talking, I leave the room knowing that when I come back he will still be talking.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

DaveM said:


> (i.e. outside of an analysis of the music or evaluation of objective evidence about how these composers are viewed by experts and the public).


But that sounds like a musicology degree confers a special expertise on all meaningful aspects of the "qualitative" position of Mozart and Beethoven.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> When a Phd starts talking, I leave the room knowing that when I come back he will still be talking.


Do you not have a Ph.D then?


----------



## Guest (Mar 1, 2018)

DaveM said:


> Ethnomusicology emphasizes non-western music or music outside music of the European tradition so an Ethnomusicology Phd does doesn't confer special expertise about Mozart vs. Beethoven. In fact, a musicology degree doesn't confer a special expertise on the qualitative position of Mozart vs. Beethoven (i.e. outside of an analysis of the music or evaluation of objective evidence about how these composers are viewed by experts and the public).


Let's say he's across all areas of music and plays the trombone in an orchestra. And he certainly has more expertise on musical matters than most people, despite your comments. I simply put my comments in to show how a conversation on the topic of Beethoven was made and summarized. Many experts make different observations about Mozart, for example, and Stephen Kovacevich says much the same as my PhD friend about Beethoven. Others do about Mozart. Less so about Haydn - very strangely - since he was the major influence on Beethoven and a truly great composer.


----------



## Guest (Mar 1, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> When a Phd starts talking, I leave the room knowing that when I come back he will still be talking.


My friends who have PhDs are not like that; in fact, one of them is a Doctor of Mechanical Engineering (Oxford) and a shy man who is a deep music-lover. Stop with the stereotypes and cliches.


----------



## Guest (Mar 1, 2018)

Dan Ante said:


> Sorry to say after a couple of nights listening to them, I can listen to WAMs St Qts no problem but they just don't grab me I have grown out of them much preferring Beethoven, Shostakovich etc.


Same!!! Though I do like some of Mozart's chamber music, preferring THEM to Shostakovich. And, of course, I love a couple of the operas. Don't we all?


----------



## Guest (Mar 1, 2018)

Genoveva said:


> Even though Mozart wrote:
> 
> 41 symphonies
> 27 piano concertos
> ...


Show me yours and I'll show you mine!


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Christabel said:


> I told him "Beethoven speaks in the singular genius of the individual human mind on a par with Pythagoras, Einstein, Newton et al". His reply, "yes, of course, and that's what I've always told my children".


I don't want to be rude here, but did you not think his reply was mocking you?


----------



## Guest (Mar 1, 2018)

Kieran said:


> I don't want to be rude here, but did you not think his reply was mocking you?


No, he was in agreement. I have heard many other people make the same observation about Beethoven. And Bach. And I think you do want to be rude.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Christabel said:


> No, he was in agreement. I have heard many other people make the same observation about Beethoven. And Bach. And I think you do want to be rude.


On the contrary, it just sounded like a witty remark by him, though not necessarily hostile to you. By the way, I've heard many people say the same thing about Shakespeare, Homer, Dante, and Mozart.

Et al...


----------



## Bluecrab (Jun 24, 2014)

Genoveva said:


> Even though Mozart wrote:
> 
> 41 symphonies
> 27 piano concertos
> ...


Which proves exactly what, other than that Mozart was a prolific composer?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Genoveva said:


> Even though Mozart wrote:
> 41 symphonies
> 27 piano concertos
> (etc. etc. etc.)​


​
Jelly beans come 50 to a bag, cost little, and make you fat. A properly prepared Chateaubriand, on the other hand, is expensive, takes long to prepare, and brings by far the greater pleasure. Thus Mozart versus Beethoven.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Bluecrab said:


> Which proves exactly what, other than that Mozart was a prolific composer?


I think it was to show that there's more to Mozart than just being a "theatrical composer." In fact, so much more that it encompasses everything...


----------



## Tallisman (May 7, 2017)

Christabel said:


> This is just staggering sonata amongst a field of contenders in Beethoven's oeuvre which are already at a phenomenally high level:
> There are two separate performances here for comparative purposes, with excellent accompanying notes:
> 
> 
> ...


What an absolute little wonder sonata is. That opening just seems to float in out of nowhere. It's one of the few pieces of music in the repertoire that almost doesn't seem to begin.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Christabel said:


> Show me yours and I'll show you mine!


Are you serious....................


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Christabel said:


> Let's say he's across all areas of music and plays the trombone in an orchestra. And he certainly has more expertise on musical matters than most people, despite your comments. I simply put my comments in to show how a conversation on the topic of Beethoven was made and summarized. Many experts make different observations about Mozart, for example, and Stephen Kovacevich says much the same as my PhD friend about Beethoven. Others do about Mozart. Less so about Haydn - very strangely - since he was the major influence on Beethoven and a truly great composer.


My point was that your discussion with your friend about Mozart had more to do with personal opinions rather than those that derive from professional expertise. Thus, IMO, Phd degrees are neither here nor there on the subject.

Personally, I find the comment that Mozart was a 'theatrical composer', as if that defines him, misleading. Insofar as his late operas were among the greatest ever written, he was that, but he was also a consummate composer in other important areas as well.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Tallisman said:


> What an absolute little wonder sonata is. That opening just seems to float in out of nowhere. It's one of the few pieces of music in the repertoire that almost doesn't seem to begin.


Schiff makes the same comment in his lecture on the Op. 109. Another sonata that seems to start in mid-stream is the Op. 101.

BTW Schiff's lecture on the Op. 109 is extremely interesting since he draws a number of unexpected parallels between that sonata and other music.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Tallisman said:


> What an absolute little wonder sonata is. That opening just seems to float in out of nowhere. It's one of the few pieces of music in the repertoire that almost doesn't seem to begin.


I know that this is an oft discussed subject, but the final minutes of this sonata just before the restatement of the Adagio theme is such a wonderment that not only does one marvel that a deaf man could conjure it up, but also raises the question whether, in fact, the deafness allowed Beethoven to tap into a part of his brain that is not available to most of us!


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Mandryka said:


> Do you not have a Ph.D then?


No, but my dad, brother, three uncles and two cousins have them.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Christabel said:


> My friends who have PhDs are not like that; in fact, one of them is a Doctor of Mechanical Engineering (Oxford) and a shy man who is a deep music-lover. Stop with the stereotypes and cliches.


Lighten up - it was a semi-joke.


----------



## Guest (Mar 2, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> Lighten up - it was a semi-joke.


Caught and bowled.

Here is what Jonathan Biss says about the Beethoven "Appassionata" in his Curtis Institute lecture; I cut and pasted it and it provides a little insight into that excellent course, if anybody is interested. Sure, I already know must of this material but it's nice to have your own beliefs reinforced by the experts. As you will see there's a strong narrative arc and drama aplenty in the sonata:

*It is, famously, not an easy piece to play, and it's not a particularly easy piece to talk about either. This is partially on account of it being complex and mysterious, but a major source of the difficulty is the work's massive popularity. The 'Appassionata' entered the repertoire and the public imagination very quickly, and it has never left. Beethoven declared it his favorite among the 23 sonatas he'd already written. The first complete performance of the 32 sonatas came only late in the 19th century - Hans von Bülow was the pianist. But as early as 1838, when the great pianist Clara Wieck, later wife to Schumann and muse to Brahms, when she made her Viennese debut, it was the 'Appassionata' that gave her her greatest success. In the 20th century, it was part of the performance repertoire of nearly every pianist of note, and it features in most of their discographies, as well. Just last year, at the piano auditions for the Curtis Institute, in this very room, there were about 120 applicants. Each was required to play a sonata by Beethoven or Mozart, of their own choosing; over 35 of them chose the 'Appassionata'. To an only slightly lesser extent than the 5th Symphony, there is a myth around the 'Appassionata' Sonata, and it's a real struggle, when listening to a performance, to hear the piece and not the myth.

As listeners to music, we are, all of us, very suggestible: we tend to hear what we expect to hear, and the stronger the expectations, the more likely this is to be the case. So when listening to the 'Appassionata', or when playing it, or analyzing it, the main task is to bring open ears - to reverse the curse of ubiquity, and to try to hear it as if for the first time. It is in that spirit that I would like to approach it now. One of the reasons, I think, that the 'Appassionata' has so captivated audiences, is its unrelentingly tragic nature - its remorselessness. Beethoven wrote a great many pieces that begin in tragic mode, but there are surprisingly few that end up there as well. He very often wrote pieces with an anguish-to-triumph arc, like the 5th Symphony and the 9th Symphony. There are other pieces which don't end in triumph, but still have a darkness-to-light narrative; you know the Sonata Opus 111 is a particularly magnificent example of that. Then there are pieces like the 'Kreutzer' Sonata, which sheds its intensity in its last movement, replacing it with playfulness, even frivolity. And finally, there are quite a number of minor key pieces with misterioso endings, like the early C minor Piano Trio, or the A minor Violin Sonata. In all of these cases, the terror that defines the work's opening ultimately morphs into something very different. So really, you can count on one hand the pieces with the kind of merciless quality one finds in the 'Appassionata', pieces which remain dark to the bitter end - bitter being the operative word. There is the Sonata Opus 27, Number 2, the ill-named "Moonlight," but that piece is so formally experimental, it's really a bit of a one-off, and anyway, it doesn't have nearly the scope of the 'Appassionata' - for one thing, it's only about two-thirds as long. Then there's the C minor Violin Sonata Opus 30, Number 2; but while its last movement has a similarly terrifying coda, it can't begin to match the 'Appassionata' in terms of the depth of the drama. In some ways, the piece that comes closest to it is the extraordinary String Quartet Opus 131, whose last movement has a similar kind of controlled fury, which is then truly unleashed near the end. But even in this case, at the very last moment, the music shifts into the major mode. It's not exactly light, but there's a hint of compromise, which is not a quality one would ever associate with the end of the 'Appassionata'. There is one piece that is a proper analogue to the 'Appassionata' in terms of its start-to-finish darkness, and that is the E minor String Quartet, Opus 59, Number 2. The two pieces were written around the same time, and I strongly recommend you listen to it. First of all, it is one of the great works of the middle period, with one of Beethoven's really most glorious slow movements. But it also truly is a close cousin of the 'Appassionata', and therefore it should be of interest to any student of the piece. The two pieces share one very vital detail, which I'll get into shortly. But again, what really binds them, and distinguishes them from most of Beethoven's music, is their journey from black to blacker still. The finale of the quartet has, in its rhythm, and its suggestion of a major mode, just a hint of jauntiness about it, which is nowhere to be found in the sonata, but both works end in a way that can only be described as a descent into hell. *


----------



## Guest (Mar 2, 2018)

Here is the extraordinary Stephen Kovacevich (a hero of mine) talking about Beethoven and his early musical life. Here he plays a movement from a Partita by Bach - a piece of preternatural calm and transcendent beauty unlike any other:






Love your work, Stephen.


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

Bluecrab said:


> Which proves exactly what, other than that Mozart was a prolific composer?


I produced the long list of genres in which Mozart wrote in order to demonstrate that he wasn't just a prolific composer but one who was very diverse in terms of the the kind of music that was fashionable at the time. This was to refute the suggestion that Mozart was mainly a "theatrical composer".


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Dan Ante said:


> I have the Schiff lectures on my PC and mp3 player and put onto CD they are a gold mine.


I recently listened to the Schiff lessons for a second time, this time with the sheet music before me. After hearing him discuss each movement I would listen to performances of that movement by five different performers with contrasting styles (but not Schiff). I did this over several months, generally at the rate of one movement per day. It really increased my appreciation of the music tenfold.

I also enjoyed the first set of Biss lectures - I think he's done several now. As to Schubert's output in 1828, my vague recollection is that he was quoting Britten.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

It's certainly cool to find a professional that shares and elucidates your stance gracefully. However, it doesn't make it fact, and as you said, there are scholars out there that praise Mozart too.

I typically read that Mozart is all in the performer and that the simplicity of the passages is matched with delicate and challenging dynamics that if performed improperly, can ruin the greatness of the music.

I don't know how one can listen to the 40th Symphony by Mozart and not be floored!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Captainnumber36 said:


> ...I don't know how one can listen to the 40th Symphony by Mozart and not be floored!


I remember reading somebody writing a long time ago: "The wonder is not that Mozart wrote the symphony in six weeks; the wonder is that he wrote it at all."


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

KenOC said:


> I remember reading somebody writing a long time ago: "The wonder is not that Mozart wrote the symphony in six weeks; the wonder is that he wrote it at all."


The wonder is that he wrote ALL THREE in six weeks, the 39th, 40th and 41st.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

jdec said:


> The wonder is that he wrote ALL THREE in six weeks, the 39th, 40th and 41st.


And the real wonder on top of this is that, in the same period, he also wrote the great adagio and fugue, K546, a piano sonata, a violin sonata, and a piano trio - along with variations and fragments for other stuff.

This shows that Mozart wasn't "just" in full symph mode for the summer of 1788, but that his inspiration was so complete that he was capable of switching modes, fulfilling sundry other commissions, while also composing three perfect masterpieces that drove the symphony further than it had been at this time.


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2018)

This Sonata sounds like it was influenced by Mozart, but as you move along the Haydnesque influence becomes more apparent. Beethoven has an infinite number of ways of exploring the most limited and unpromising motivic material. This is a fairly slight work, but charming nonetheless: follow Schnabel with the score


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Is it cool to like the sonatas of Beethoven, Mozart, Schubert, Haydn, and *Handel?* I do.
> 
> Beethoven will always be my favourite overall composer but I greatly enjoy the others also. No I don't find Mozart boring, I find him more formal and flowery at times, but it works.


Those where suites!


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

It's my opinion that there's as much genius in Mozart as in Beethoven. Beethoven excelling in Dionysian profoundness and Mozart excelling in Apollonian effortlessness and grace.

For a true Nietzscheanist (is that a word?) that's probably not a difficult choice. BUT on the other hand sometimes I think it must be easier to evoke genius with profoundness and struggle then with lightness and grace. Therefore I always give Mozart lots of credit. 

And doesn't "Der Hölle Rache" sound like a real Dionysian masterpiece?


----------



## beetzart (Dec 30, 2009)

Christabel said:


> This is not only a profoundly gifted musical intelligence but one of the greatest minds in human history:


Yes, yes I've always seen Beethoven as the de facto greatest musician ever and probably or arguably the greatest human ever born. 
But of course it is subjective, yet if you could somehow calculate the amount of pleasure his efforts have given people since he played his first composition it would suggest that he is a good candidate for being the greatest minds.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

beetzart said:


> Yes, yes I've always seen Beethoven as the de facto greatest musician ever and probably or arguably the greatest human ever born.
> But of course it is subjective, yet if you could somehow calculate the amount of pleasure his efforts have given people since he played his first composition it would suggest that he is a good candidate for being the greatest minds.


I would rate Beethoven below Newton, Einstein, Plato, etc. simply because of the large subjective part of his music. Although I'm not a big fan of Bach's music, from overfamiliarity, he was way more extensive in his use of harmony, which all other composers offer but a cross section of, but build in other ways.


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2018)

I've just been advised within the last 30 minutes of the death of a close friend of 46 years. This is my first port of call in such circumstances: one of Beethoven's cosmic masterpieces. The second movement only:


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Christabel said:


> I've just been advised within the last 30 minutes of the death of a close friend of 46 years. This is my first port of call in such circumstances: one of Beethoven's cosmic masterpieces. The second movement only:


I have some of his CDs, he was a great pianist. RIP


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Christabel said:


> I've just been advised within the last 30 minutes of the death of a close friend of 46 years.


I'm sorry for your loss...


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Christabel said:


> I've just finished the *Curtis Institute of Music* online course on the Beethoven Piano Sonatas and the lectures of Jonathan Biss. My lifetime love of these works is only further enhanced by this excellent course and it is highly recommended. Biss says something which crystallizes everything I've always believed/felt about Mozart: that successive generations of composers never felt that Mozart was a composer who had to be 'grappled with'. Admired, yes, but Mozart never really stepped outside the classical conventions of his time. So, Beethoven had to be 'grappled with' and his piano sonatas irrevocably changed the musical landscape. That's why my love has always been directed towards Beethoven and why Mozart bores me, essentially.
> 
> I found myself having my own long-time views reinforced during this excellent course and that was very gratifying. And also that I believed Schubert would have been the equal of Beethoven had that young composer survived; I have long thought that. Biss says the year 1828 - the one after Beethoven's death - was arguably the greatest compositional *yea*r in the history of music and he identifies those last great masterworks of Schubert. And Schubert could and did grapple with Beethoven whilst bringing his own inimitable 'voice' to the fore. Wonderful stuff.


An interesting note, Mozart DID step outside the conventions of his time to some degree. Maybe not wholly in the instrumental musical composition, but from some of the choices of his operas. An opera about mere servants instead of gods. An opera about someone escaping a harem in Arabia....this were at least somewhat shocking. I know that's not precisely what you refer to but I thought they were worth noting.


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2018)

Sonata, you make an excellent point about the opera/s!! Surely they are *absolutely incredible*. And Biss agrees with me that Mozart was a creature of the theatre, essentially. I love the final 4 or 5 symphonies, I have to say; I just think the concertos and piano sonatas are not his best work. The D Minor piano concerto is an exception, though. Only sorry Mozart didn't put his understanding of the human condition into these instrumental works as Beethoven did. In those sonatas of LvB we get all shades of the human conditions and then some more. I like the idea of 'cosmic' with regard to his work and this, as well as genius, is what makes him one of the great minds of humankind. A close study of the sonatas will reveal their orchestral/symphonic scope and their endless ingenuity.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Christabel said:


> Only sorry Mozart didn't put his understanding of the human condition into these instrumental works as Beethoven did.


Well he did, but you just don't hear it. Here's an interesting masterclass I posted elsewhere by Dame Mitsuko, on Mozart's 25th and Beethoven's 4th piano concertos. This is musical criticism without agenda, and with appreciation and understanding of the music.






With regards to piano sonatas, largely Mozart composed these for talented pupils, so obviously they were never going to be as forensic or as representative of his great talents - but they're no pushovers either. #14 was definitely an influence on Beethoven, with references to the second movement in Beethoven's Pathetique. The later sonatas are things of beauty. Some of the younger ones, particularly #8, are excellent...


----------



## Guest (Mar 6, 2018)

Beethoven's are 'things of beauty' but terrifying and wonderful in equal proportion. And if we 'don't hear it' in the music of Mozart then it isn't there because I'm a musician, musicologist and lifelong music lover. We always hear these old chestnuts about Mozart..."oh, you just don't understand it....you don't hear it....." etc. etc. It's the clearest music you'll ever hear - transparent to the last degree. And that's the problem. For me.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Christabel said:


> And if we 'don't hear it' in the music of Mozart then it isn't there because I'm a musician, musicologist and lifelong music lover.


Yeah, Dame Mitso hears it. Daniel Barenboim hears it. Scnabel heard it. Brendel. I could go on. And on. All the books on Mozart I've read, by "musicians, musicologists and lifelong music lovers." Great composers, music teachers and top class performers.

I think I'll take their word for it ahead of yours, if you don't mind. Especially since I hear what they all hear, too...


----------



## Guest (Mar 9, 2018)

Dan Ante said:


> Are you serious....................


Absolutely not!!:lol:


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Christabel said:


> Beethoven's are 'things of beauty' but terrifying and wonderful in equal proportion. And if we 'don't hear it' in the music of Mozart then it isn't there because I'm a musician, musicologist and lifelong music lover. We always hear these old chestnuts about Mozart..."oh, you just don't understand it....you don't hear it....." etc. etc. It's the clearest music you'll ever hear - transparent to the last degree. And that's the problem. For me.


I for one can respect this opinion.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Christabel said:


> Beethoven's are 'things of beauty' but terrifying and wonderful in equal proportion. And if we 'don't hear it' in the music of Mozart then it isn't there because I'm a musician, musicologist and lifelong music lover. We always hear these old chestnuts about Mozart..."oh, you just don't understand it....you don't hear it....." etc. etc. It's the clearest music you'll ever hear - transparent to the last degree. And that's the problem. For me.


I can agree Mozart's music is transparent and straightforward and that this could deter listeners from enjoyment like yourself. I for one love the wittiness of his melodies and they strike me as undeniably clever (mostly from his late period). It's not music you search through and ponder for ages in terms of deep meaning, but it's highly enjoyable and earth shattering, praising the universe, and even god. Where Beethoven seems to be the struggle, Mozart seems to be the light.


----------



## Guest (Mar 10, 2018)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I can agree Mozart's music is transparent and straightforward and that this could deter listeners from enjoyment like yourself. I for one love the wittiness of his melodies and they strike me as undeniably clever (mostly from his late period). It's not music you search through and ponder for ages in terms of deep meaning, but it's highly enjoyable and earth shattering, praising the universe, and even god. Where Beethoven seems to be the struggle, Mozart seems to be the light.


Great comment!!


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Christabel said:


> Beethoven's are 'things of beauty' but terrifying and wonderful in equal proportion. And if we 'don't hear it' in the music of Mozart then it isn't there because I'm a musician, musicologist and lifelong music lover. We always hear these old chestnuts about Mozart..."oh, you just don't understand it....you don't hear it....." etc. etc. It's the clearest music you'll ever hear - transparent to the last degree. And that's the problem. For me.


I find Beethoven more transparent. Terrifying and wonderful, yes. Not so much things of beauty to me. Mozart's music works on more levels to me. I heard it said his music can appeal to the layman and the musical connoisseur. There is an element beyond the written notes.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I can agree Mozart's music is transparent and straightforward and that this could deter listeners from enjoyment like yourself. I for one love the wittiness of his melodies and they strike me as undeniably clever (mostly from his late period). It's not music you search through and ponder for ages in terms of deep meaning, but it's highly enjoyable and earth shattering, praising the universe, and even god. Where Beethoven seems to be the struggle, Mozart seems to be the light.


To a large extent, this is just another version of the old cliche that, oh Mozart, so light and witty, kind of like the six minute cartoon before the heavy blockbuster! Sort of like a light transparent salad, before the Meathoven.

I kinda prefer the more engaged thoughts of great musicians like Dame Mitso and Bernstein and Barenboim, who understood that beneath the surface sheen there lies something invariably poignant and tragic. I don't know who it was who said it, but the resurgence in understanding Mozart's music came after WW2, when it was felt that the more histrionic and egoistic Romantic music was insufficient to the task of providing solace and understanding of mans greatest crimes. Only in mozart did this writer hear music that could encapsulate the inarticulate emotions that followed. Not fist pumping defiance, but resignation to our wretched fate...


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

Kieran said:


> ...I don't know who it was who said it, but the resurgence in understanding Mozart's music came after WW2, when it was felt that the more histrionic and egoistic Romantic music was insufficient to the task of providing solace and understanding of mans greatest crimes. Only in mozart did this writer hear music that could encapsulate the inarticulate emotions that followed. Not fist pumping defiance, but resignation to our wretched fate...


I had occasion in another thread recently to refer to the "neo-classical" movement that developed from around the turn of the 19th/20th C for the next 40-odd years or so. It began as a kind of rejection of the excesses of romanticism in terms of over-emotional music. Prokofiev's "Classical Symphony" dating from around 1916 was a notable early example of this work, and several other very good composers followed. Stravinsky was a follower for a while. These composers didn't just go back as far as the "classical era" on which to base their works but some went even further back in time.

Also worth mentioning in the same context was the growth of impressionism, a movement that was particularly associated with Debussy and Ravel but several others followed. This movement started even earlier, and was another form of trying to get away from what they perceived as the excessive grip of romanticism. They partly blamed the bad influence as they saw it as a result of Beethoven's legacy, and Ravel was especially unimpressed with Beethoven.

There is a great deal of neoclassical and impressionist music that is of superb quality. I'm not impartial to a bit of slushy romantism now and then but generally feel happier listening to late classical and early romantism, or these later neoclassical or impressionist works. There is vast amount of high quality piano work from the latter styles that is very worth while looking into, instead of getting over-wrapped up in Beethoven's piano work as if nothing else compares


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Genoveva said:


> I had occasion in another thread recently to refer to the "neo-classical" movement that developed from around the turn of the 19th/20th C for the next 40-odd years or so. It began as a kind of rejection of the excesses of romanticism in terms of over-emotional music. Prokofiev's "Classical Symphony" dating from around 1916 was a notable early example of this work, and several other very good composers followed. Stravinsky was a follower for a while. These composers didn't just go back as far as the "classical era" on which to base their works but some went even further back in time.
> 
> Also worth mentioning in the same context was the growth of impressionism, a movement that was particularly associated with Debussy and Ravel but several others followed. This movement started even earlier, and was another form of trying to get away from what they perceived as the excessive grip of romanticism. They partly blamed the bad influence as they saw it as a result of Beethoven's legacy, and Ravel was especially unimpressed with Beethoven.
> 
> There is a great deal of neoclassical and impressionist music that is of superb quality. I'm not impartial to a bit of slushy romantism now and then but generally feel happier listening to late classical and early romantism, or these later neoclassical or impressionist works. There is vast amount of high quality piano work from the latter styles that is very worth while looking into, instead of getting over-wrapped up in Beethoven's piano work as if nothing else compares


So Beethoven gets thrown under the bus because some late 19th/early 20th century composers had a hissy fit over romanticism? I don't know what to make of the last sentence. It's as if Beethoven's piano music is the only thing people are wrapped up in i.e. Schubert, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Chopin, Liszt, Brahms et al didn't exist.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Razumovskymas said:


> It's my opinion that there's as much genius in Mozart as in Beethoven. Beethoven excelling in Dionysian profoundness and Mozart excelling in Apollonian effortlessness and grace.
> 
> For a true Nietzscheanist (is that a word?) that's probably not a difficult choice. BUT on the other hand sometimes I think it must be easier to evoke genius with profoundness and struggle then with lightness and grace. Therefore I always give Mozart lots of credit.
> 
> And doesn't "Der Hölle Rache" sound like a real Dionysian masterpiece?


Ok forget what I said earlier. I'm listening to the Eroïca symphony and there's no doubt about it, Beethoven is the boss. Having heard that symphony so many times and it's still genius. This is beyond music. Only with Beethoven things come to my mind like: no other composer comes even close.

And Fidelio...wel yeah..


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Razumovskymas said:


> Ok forget what I said earlier. I'm listening to the Eroïca symphony and there's no doubt about it, Beethoven is the boss. Having heard that symphony so many times and it's still genius. This is beyond music. Only with Beethoven things come to my mind like: no other composer comes even close.
> 
> And Fidelio...wel yeah..


:lol: haha!
15 Characters


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> Mozart's music works on more levels to me. I heard it said his music can appeal to the layman and the musical connoisseur. There is an element beyond the written notes.


Uh, yeah, Mozart said it.  In a letter to his dad.



Genoveva said:


> There is a great deal of neoclassical and impressionist music that is of superb quality. I'm not impartial to a bit of slushy romantism now and then but generally feel happier listening to late classical and early romantism, or these later neoclassical or impressionist works. *There is vast amount of high quality piano work from the latter styles that is very worth while looking into, instead of getting over-wrapped up in Beethoven's piano work as if nothing else compares*[/SIZE][/FONT]


Why would this be an either/or situation? You are aware that Beethoven's piano sonatas are universally regarded as among the most important contributions to the genre, right? I think most listeners have space in their brains for both Beethoven and later piano composers. And what does slushy romanticism have to do with this?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

All of Mitsuko Uchida's late Beethoven sonatas, starting with the Hammerklavier, are on YouTube in what look like "official" uploads. I listened to them all today and thought they were very good.


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

EdwardBast said:


> Genoveva said:
> 
> 
> > There is a great deal of neoclassical and impressionist music that is of superb quality. I'm not impartial to a bit of slushy romantism now and then but generally feel happier listening to late classical and early romantism, or these later neoclassical or impressionist works. There is vast amount of high quality piano work from the latter styles that is very worth while looking into, instead of getting over-wrapped up in Beethoven's piano work as if nothing else compares.
> ...


An either/or situation? It beats me how you could possibly reach that understanding. The text you quote is simply saying that Beethoven's piano sonatas are not the only great works in this genre. That doesn't imply either/or, but rather that both Beethoven and other material are worth looking at, including work by other late classical composers and impressionism composers, among others.

As for "slushy romanticism", if you had bothered to look more carefully at what I wrote, you will see that it was a response to a post by Kieron (#85) in which he noted that _"…the more histrionic and egoistic Romantic music was insufficient to the task of providing solace and understanding of mans greatest crimes. Only in mozart did this writer hear music that could encapsulate the inarticulate emotions that followed." _ I referred instead to "slushy romaticism", meaning the same thing as "more histrionic and egoistic Romantic music". This should have been obvious.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Genoveva said:


> An either/or situation? It beats me how you could possibly reach that understanding. The text you quote is simply saying that Beethoven's piano sonatas are not the only great works in this genre. That doesn't imply either/or, but rather that both Beethoven and other material are worth looking at, including work by other late classical composers and impressionism composers, among others.


That text implied an either/or situation to me also (as I posted just before EdwardBast). As a matter of fact, the whole paragraph with that final sentence is a bit of a head-scratcher.


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

DaveM said:


> That text implied an either/or situation to me also (as I posted just before EdwardBast). As a matter of fact, the whole paragraph with that final sentence is a bit of a head-scratcher.


I can't understand what you are going on about.

It's perfectly clear to me that I was simply saying that I disagree with those who think that Beethoven's piano solo work is unmatched in quality by all other composers, as alleged by the OP in various posts.

I don't know how I have made this point any plainer than what I said in the last sentence, to which you refer: "_There is vast amount of high quality piano work from the latter styles that is very worth while looking into, instead of getting over-wrapped up in Beethoven's piano work as if nothing else compares."_

What is it you don't understand about this sentence?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Genoveva said:


> I can't understand what you are going on about.
> 
> It's perfectly clear to me that I was simply saying that I disagree with those who think that Beethoven's piano solo work is unmatched in quality by all other composers, as alleged by the OP in various posts.
> 
> ...


The point you were trying to make is clearer in your two explanations above. IMO, the problem was in the_ 'getting over wrapped in Beethoven's piano work'_ as if people who adore Beethoven's piano works are blinded to the point that they can't appreciate other piano works. Which is a little presumptuous.


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

DaveM said:


> The point you were trying to make is clearer in your two explanations above. IMO, the problem was in the_ 'getting over wrapped in Beethoven's piano work'_ as if people who adore Beethoven's piano works are blinded to the point that they can't appreciate other piano works. Which is a little presumptuous.


OK that's fine. I'm glad it's sorted.


----------



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

Does anyone think that piano sonatas would perhaps sound better if they were arranged for an orchestra, or a string quartet?

Like, for example, this:


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I seem to remember that Felix Weingartner arranged the Hammerklavier for full orchestra. Didn't work out too well. IMO Liszt's arrangements of the symphonies for solo piano work better!


----------



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

For me personally listening to solo piano works for extended time can become irritating because of percussive sound of piano, but I really don't like how the 3rd movement sounds with this arrangement. Seems like it's too fast movement to be nicely handled by orchestra. The first two movements on the other hand sound fine to me.


----------



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

KenOC said:


> I seem to remember that Felix Weingartner arranged the Hammerklavier for full orchestra. Didn't work out too well. IMO Liszt's arrangements of the symphonies for solo piano work better!


Checking it now, thanks God Youtube exists.  5 minutes in doesn't sound too bad to me


----------



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

Here's a quote by Nietzsche that I just found on Wikipedia:

"In the lives of great artists, there are unfortunate contingencies which, for example, force the painter to sketch his most significant picture as only a fleeting thought, or which forced Beethoven to leave us only the unsatisfying piano reduction of a symphony in certain great piano sonatas (the great B flat major). In such cases, the artist coming after should try to correct the great men's lives after the fact; for example, a master of all orchestral effects would do so by restoring to life the symphony that had suffered an apparent pianistic death."


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

KenOC said:


> I seem to remember that Felix Weingartner arranged the Hammerklavier for full orchestra. Didn't work out too well. IMO Liszt's arrangements of the symphonies for solo piano work better!


Drat! Only seems to be a 1930 recording of it on YouTube.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

ZJovicic said:


> Here's a quote by Nietzsche that I just found on Wikipedia:
> 
> "In the lives of great artists, there are unfortunate contingencies which, for example, force the painter to sketch his most significant picture as only a fleeting thought, or which forced Beethoven to leave us only the unsatisfying piano reduction of a symphony in certain great piano sonatas (the great B flat major). In such cases, the artist coming after should try to correct the great men's lives after the fact; for example, a master of all orchestral effects would do so by restoring to life the symphony that had suffered an apparent pianistic death."


Ah, the musical giant that was Nietzsche. He was to musical composition what Herod was to child welfare.:lol:


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

ZJovicic said:


> but I really don't like how the 3rd movement sounds with this arrangement. Seems like it's too fast movement to be nicely handled by orchestra.


Yes, I agree, it made me think how much of Beethoven's piano writing is effective because it demands visible, audible, virtuosity, like Scarlatti.


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

ZJovicic said:


> Does anyone think that piano sonatas would perhaps sound better if they were arranged for an orchestra, or a string quartet?


That's just wrong, I'm not listening to that, it might damage me forever. Does anyone think that caviar produced by a master is better when turned into a three course meal by a hack?


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

ZJovicic said:


> Checking it now, thanks God Youtube exists.  5 minutes in doesn't sound too bad to me


Given my penchant for ready meals someone just said I had a corrupt palette. You may be heading in that direction, music wise, by listening to this stuff. Save yourself! Reconstruct your palette! I suggest back to back listening to the Kempff(mono) and Kovacevich box sets of Beethoven sonatas - and try other soloists if you don't like their takes on particular sonatas (even the best caviar waiter drops the plate once in a blue moonlight...)


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

ZJovicic said:


> Does anyone think that piano sonatas would perhaps sound better if they were arranged for an orchestra, or a string quartet?


No, I don't think so. They would sound 'different' but not necessarily 'better' - to hold the latter opinion would be to suggest that there was something 'missing' from a work for a solo instrument and I do not hold that to be the case.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

ZJovicic said:


> Does anyone think that piano sonatas would perhaps sound better if they were arranged for an orchestra, or a string quartet?
> 
> Like, for example, this:


An utterly forgettable arrangement IMO.


----------



## Marc (Jun 15, 2007)

premont said:


> An utterly forgettable arrangement IMO.


They should have picked the organ instead.


----------



## Marc (Jun 15, 2007)

A nice thread to read so far, but I always find it a pity (and largely an unnecessity) to define someone's greatness by underrating others. IMO, there's no need to prove Beethoven's greatness by saying that Mozart was less a genius.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Christabel said:


> Beethoven's are 'things of beauty' but terrifying and wonderful in equal proportion. *And if we 'don't hear it' in the music of Mozart then it isn't there because I'm a musician, musicologist* and lifelong music lover. We always hear these old chestnuts about Mozart..."oh, you just don't understand it....you don't hear it....." etc. etc. It's the clearest music you'll ever hear - transparent to the last degree. And that's the problem. For me.


I somehow find that hard to believe given the nature of some of your comments. As any musicologist knows - music is highly subjective - what is gold to one, may be rubbish to another.

But who are you then?

anyone can try to pull rank to prove their point - but unless you identify yourself it's meaningless.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

Better deleted to not open a can of worms : - )


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2018)

stomanek said:


> I somehow find that hard to believe given the nature of some of your comments. As any musicologist knows - music is highly subjective - what is gold to one, may be rubbish to another.
> 
> But who are you then?
> 
> anyone can try to pull rank to prove their point - but unless you identify yourself it's meaningless.


And vice versa. I am entitled to my opinion and I believe you are to yours. Trying to pull rank? I think you have actually pulled 'the other one'.


----------



## Guest (Mar 22, 2018)

jdec said:


> Better deleted to not open a can of worms : - )


Just about the most intelligent contribution to this discussion thus far.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

ZJovicic said:


> Does anyone think that piano sonatas would perhaps sound better if they were arranged for an orchestra, or a string quartet?
> 
> Like, for example, this:


The best I can say is that it becomes a rather different piece, and a less persuasive one. Beethoven's piano sonatas are written for the piano by a pianist. They are pianistic in their figurations and their sonorous deployment of the instrument's qualities (which were of course a bit different on Beethoven's pianos than on ours). Composers write different kinds of music for different forces; they design their musical ideas to take advantage of the effect of the instruments that play it. Transcriptions can be interesting, but they're apt to change the music in significant ways.

Orchestrations of Beethoven's string quartets for string orchestra sound wrong to me, and so does this. I don't see a need for it, as there's plenty of repertoire for string orchestra.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Christabel said:


> And vice versa. * I am entitled to my opinion and I believe you are to yours. *Trying to pull rank? I think you have actually pulled 'the other one'.


I am not the one claiming any professional position or expertise.

You sound like a rank amateur trying to establish the supremacy of your view with an appeal to authority.

No true music scholar would make such a crass comment as claiming there is no depth to Mozart's music.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2018)

This is the sonata I've been exploring further today with Curtis Institute online:






I agree that Schubert would have been influenced by the slow inner movement. Oh, what a ride and journey the whole thing is!! I absolutely ADORE IT. The terse thematic material and drama which bookends the tender and almost operatic "Italianate" inner movement.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Christabel said:


> This is the sonata I've been exploring further today with Curtis Institute online:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The #5 Adagio has one of Beethoven's more hauntingly beautiful openings. Likewise the coda is amazing -starting at about 12:50 it restates the main theme yet in a new way and then brings about a resolution as if a question being asked throughout the movement is now answered. This was one of my favorite Beethoven movements to play.


----------



## Guest (Mar 23, 2018)

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this. You are so right about the question and answer structure. If I recall this sonata has the second movement ending on a "tierce", which many call a Picardy third. I prefer the older definition. 

Those last great few sonatas for the piano by Beethoven have been on my sound system these last days. And I've also been listening to Schubert's last 3. What a year for composition 1828 was!! On his deathbed Schubert was inspired by and demonstrated his love and admiration for Beethoven with D958, 959 and 960.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

stomanek said:


> I am not the one claiming any professional position or expertise.
> 
> You sound like a rank amateur trying to establish the supremacy of your view with an appeal to authority.
> 
> No true music scholar would make such a crass comment as claiming there is no depth to Mozart's music.


Yeah, an appeal to authority is fine, if it helps illustrate a point, but to appeal to our own authority as being somehow enough to prove our point in an internet debate, well that's kinda like waving a white flag...


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Marc said:


> They should have picked the organ instead.


Or the harpsichord:






Huguette Grémy-Chauliac playing Beethoven sonatas op.27 no.2, op. 13 and op. 2 no.1 on a harpsichord by Hubert Bédard!


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

premont said:


> Or the harpsichord:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting!

Reminds me that as a hardcore Beethoven-fan I should never forget to listen to that 1st movement of the moonlight sonata now and then. Despite it being hijacked by the collective conscience it still is a wonderful (and actually strange) piece of music.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Razumovskymas said:


> Interesting!
> 
> Reminds me that as a hardcore Beethoven-fan I should never forget to listen to that 1st movement of the moonlight sonata now and then. Despite it being hijacked by the collective conscience it still is a wonderful (and actually strange) piece of music.


I wouldn't say strange so much as unusual. Beethoven, nor anyone else, ever wrote anything else quite like it.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

DaveM said:


> I wouldn't say strange so much as unusual. Beethoven, nor anyone else, ever wrote anything else quite like it


indeed.

Also funny that it became so popular. Virtually everybody not being into classical music knows this movement without knowing any other movement of any other Beethoven sonata.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

I didn't know that these Beethoven sonatas were "Pour Clavecln ou Piano-Forte" 

I'd picked up from Rampe's notes that K 457 was the first sonata for piano-forte only -- he suggests that thereafter the sonata for piano forte only became a norm. But it seems not, and that other keyboards (harpsichords I suppose ) were prevalent enough to warrant a mention in keyboard scores as late as the publication of the Moonlight. 

It's worth reading Grémy-Chauliac's essay for the LP, which is in the comments on youtube. She makes the claim that Beethoven's piano at the time of the Moonlight -- the only piano he would have ever properly heard -- would have made a sound which resembles this harpsichord.

I must say this apparently faithful copy of an 18th century ravalement by Bédard after a 17th century Ruckers harpsichord sounds not half bad in Beethoven. I haven't listened to the later sonatas but I really enjoyed op 2/1


----------



## Marc (Jun 15, 2007)

Opus 28 was Beethoven's first 'piano' sonata without the addition "per il cembalo o il pianoforte". The addition returned for opus 31, and after that it was just for the 'pianoforte' or 'Hammerklavier'. At least that's what I read once in a Dutch translation of a (French) Beethoven monography, originally issued by the Librairie Hachette in 1961.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Mandryka said:


> I didn't know that these Beethoven sonatas were "Pour Clavecln ou Piano-Forte"
> 
> I'd picked up from Rampe's notes that K 457 was the first sonata for piano-forte only -- he suggests that thereafter the sonata for piano forte only became a norm. But it seems not, and that other keyboards (harpsichords I suppose ) were prevalent enough to warrant a mention in keyboard scores as late as the publication of the Moonlight.
> 
> ...


I recall a musicologist calling K271 a harpsichord concerto! It seems Mozart's k/b works were played on pf and other k/b instruments.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

What is a good and somewhat inexpensive modern collection of the Sonata cycle?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Captainnumber36 said:


> What is a good and somewhat inexpensive modern collection of the Sonata cycle?


I recommend (highly) Stewart Goodyear's recent cycle. Excellent sound, stylish and virtuosic playing. Insanely priced at $5.99 for a 320K MP3/M4A download.

https://us.7digital.com/artist/stew...te-piano-sonatas-1946009?f=20,19,12,16,17,9,2


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

KenOC said:


> I recommend (highly) Stewart Goodyear's recent cycle. Excellent sound, stylish and virtuosic playing. Insanely priced at $5.99 for a 320K MP3/M4A download.
> 
> https://us.7digital.com/artist/stew...te-piano-sonatas-1946009?f=20,19,12,16,17,9,2


I think that's the winner! Thanks, and I think I recall you recommending that set before.


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I think that's the winner! ...


Are you sure? The "experts" think the sound quality isn't great. Here's a typical comment:

https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-15707/

I liked the sound in Kovacevich's full set, now a bargain on Warner. I also liked many of the performances - not all, but I doubt anyone can do them all, to everyone's satisfaction, in great sound.


----------



## Guest (Apr 2, 2018)

So help me, I adore this sonata, Op. 7: the Rondo!! OMG


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

Although I admire Schnabel's playing I can't get past the inferior recording and/or the sound of the piano. Kovacevich is my choice for No. 4, in fact, my choice for the first eight. He storms through them with wonderful bravura in his Warner budget box set. I couldn't find his No.4 on utube. Here's an earlier No.8 from Stephen, not quite as good as what's in the Warner box (which recently won BAL) but near enough - sound not perfect, I can hear the LP rotating! But it's better than the sound given to Schnabel:




P.S. Stay with the utube playlist and hear an amazing live Waldstein from Claudio Arrau! He also has a box of the complete sonatas...


----------



## Guest (Apr 2, 2018)

Couldn't agree more about Maestro Kovacevich!! He's just superb. I posted the Schnabel because he's generally regarded as the go-to interpreter of Beethoven. But there ARE others, as we know. But what about the Sonata per se?


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

Who says Schnabel is the go to interpreter for all of Beethoven's sonatas? Rob Cowan in Guinness 1000 guide is a fan of Schnabel, making him top pick for No. 32, but he doesn't mention him as even "a possible" for No. 4. His top pick for No.4 is Backhaus:






That first movement sounds as if Beethoven himself is improvising at the piano; it has a wonderful gruff impetuousness and exciting vigour. Cowan raves about Backhaus' first movement, and I can see why! Might even be better than Kovacevich here.

Harry Halbrecht said about the Largo that it's "the first of those great spiritual meditations in which Beethoven seems to sublimate the human passions in a contemplation of the harmony of the spheres." Fair enough, in a great performance, like that of Kovacevich. Unfortunately I don't get this with Backhaus, or just hints of it, it's a bit too stop start and over intense, too fussy, too inharmonious. Things improve with the third movement, with the gentle playfulness of the allegro well performed, again has that improvisational vigour going on, and, yes, a great rondo to finish.

But we need that largo done well, we need to see the spheres moving in harmony. So Kovacevich is the choice here!

I went back to your Schnabel, I can't abide that opening, clang, clang, clang... like a piano in a Wild West salon. Blame the recording/remaster not Schnabel. Who has remastered Schnabel best? I have a pearl disk with some later Beethoven that's bearable. But, anyway, the largo is superb, very restrained, very beautiful, the spheres are moving, ... insert that between Backhaus' outer movements, and Stephen has some competition.

P.S. Rob Cowan needs to fine tune his "movement of the spheres" detector.


----------



## Guest (Apr 2, 2018)

Some people like Josef Hofmann best for Beethoven. It's all a matter of taste. But your comments were first rate and I enjoyed them, thank you very much.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

ZJovicic said:


> Here's a quote by Nietzsche that I just found on Wikipedia:
> 
> "In the lives of great artists, there are unfortunate contingencies which, for example, force the painter to sketch his most significant picture as only a fleeting thought, or which forced Beethoven to leave us only the unsatisfying piano reduction of a symphony in certain great piano sonatas (the great B flat major). In such cases, the artist coming after should try to correct the great men's lives after the fact; for example, a master of all orchestral effects would do so by restoring to life the symphony that had suffered an apparent pianistic death."


One can never quote Nietzsche too much! But I don't completely agree with this one though. At the same time I think Nietzsche is always right, even when he's wrong.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Mal said:


> Who says Schnabel is the go to interpreter for all of Beethoven's sonatas? Rob Cowan in Guinness 1000 guide is a fan of Schnabel, making him top pick for No. 32, but he doesn't mention him as even "a possible" for No. 4. His top pick for No.4 is Backhaus:


Oh I really like that Backhaus No.4!!

Do you have a different favorite pianist for every sonata? Chances are that our tastes match and in that case I would be happy to hear 31 other different names of you 

Indeed, why go for a complete cycle of 1 pianist. Beethoven deserves the best individual performance for every sonata and not someone who happens to do a fairly good average complete cycle!!


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

I'm not well listened enough to have a favourite for every sonata, I have the Kovacevich and Kempff (mono) box sets, both which were awarded Penguin rosettes, and between them I think they produce wonderful performances of most of the sonatas - luckily when one puts in an "off " performance the other seems to shine  I also have a few disks by Richter, Brendel, Gilels, Barenboim, and Jando that I like very much.


----------



## partisan (Oct 18, 2021)

Maurizio Pollini's performance of Beethoven's last three sonatas is the ultimate recording for me for their passion, depth, conviviality, and sound. If there is better, I will be awestruck!


----------

