# How Highly Do You Rate Joseph Martin Kraus "The Swedish Mozart"?



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

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

Active 1756 to 1792, sound familiar?

His music is incredibly original. We need to discover more 18th century composers of such caliber to give us new music today.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

I was listening to his symphonies, concertos and chamber music. Definitely one composer worth exploring more of.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Don't they play him a lot at IKEA?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I rate Kraus just below Mozart and Haydn, and ahead of the rest of a very crowded field. YouTube has most of his symphonies and concertos, well worth hearing.

Kraus wrote a symphony for Haydn to perform at Esterhazy. Haydn later remarked, "The symphony he wrote here in Vienna especially for me will be regarded as a masterpiece for centuries to come; believe me, there are few people who can compose something like that."

That may have been his Symphony in C minor.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

MarkW said:


> Don't they play him a lot at IKEA?


Not even remotely funny .

I rate him very highly, wonderful music .


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

KenOC said:


> I rate Kraus just below Mozart and Haydn, and ahead of the rest of a very crowded field. YouTube has most of his symphonies and concertos, well worth hearing.
> 
> Kraus wrote a symphony for Haydn to perform at Esterhazy. Haydn later remarked, "The symphony he wrote here in Vienna especially for me will be regarded as a masterpiece for centuries to come; believe me, there are few people who can compose something like that."
> 
> That may have been his Symphony in C minor.


Great stuff. Plus, he avoided putting in yet another of those dreadfully dreary Classical minuets...


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

MarkW said:


> Don't they play him a lot at IKEA?


No they play music by Karl-Birger Blomdahl.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

I am sceptical but will listen.

Too many TC members post saying - wow - listen to Clementi, CPE, Salieri etc etc - as good as Mozart, Haydn etc

total nonsense but I will try.


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

I have a limited selection of Kraus's works that includes two symphonies, two overtures, a viola concerto, two "sinfonia per la chiesa", a piano sonata, and a couple of other short religious works. 

Among this quite modest collection, I haven't discovered anything that makes any it stand out from loads of other similar material of the period, but it's all quite listenable.

Leaving aside Beethoven, among the "classical composers" Mozart and Joseph Haydn are head and shoulders above any of the rest. The rest includes some very good composers - like Michael Haydn, Boccherini, Dittersdorf, J C Bach, C P E Bach, Cimarosa, Vanhal to name just a few - whose works are worth exploring ahead of those of Joseph Kraus.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

stomanek said:


> I am sceptical but will listen.
> 
> Too many TC members post saying - wow - listen to Clementi, CPE, Salieri etc etc - as good as Mozart, Haydn etc
> 
> total nonsense but I will try.


Still, some of their music is well worth a listen. In this case, decidedly so.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

brianvds said:


> Still, some of their music is well worth a listen. In this case, decidedly so.


Quit rightly said , as if only the bigger names produced fine music.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Genoveva said:


> I have a limited selection of Kraus's works that includes two symphonies, two overtures, a viola concerto, two "sinfonia per la chiesa", a piano sonata, and a couple of other short religious works.
> 
> Among this quite modest collection, I haven't discovered anything that makes any it stand out from loads of other similar material of the period, but it's all quite listenable.
> 
> Leaving aside Beethoven, among the "classical composers" Mozart and Joseph Haydn are head and shoulders above any of the rest. *The rest includes some very good composers - like Michael Haydn, Boccherini, Dittersdorf, J C Bach, C P E Bach, Cimarosa, Vanhal to name just a few - whose works are worth exploring ahead of those of Joseph Kraus.*


I thought that would be more or less the case - I may just take your word for it as I dont get too excited about any of those


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Pugg said:


> Quit rightly said , as if only the bigger names produced fine music.


I think there is a great deal of overlap in quality between various composers. That is to say, surely some of Kraus' works are better than some of Haydn's or Mozart's. Or perhaps I am now already strolling on thin ice here. But I would think that a mature symphony by Kraus would probably be a more satisfactory listening experience than a piece of juvenilia by Mozart.

I do notice once again the same thing I notice time and again with the lesser composers though: they lacked the ability to write memorable tunes. And here too I am probably toying with controversy. Perhaps many would argue that tunes are only important to non-musicians.


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

I've only heard three symphonies on a Naxos release. It's wonderful music. I want to explore more of this great composer.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

brianvds said:


> I do notice once again the same thing I notice time and again with the lesser composers though: they lacked the ability to write memorable tunes. And here too I am probably toying with controversy. Perhaps many would argue that tunes are only important to non-musicians.


I have to disagree.
Many less known composers did write a lot of memorable tunes.
Regarding non-musicians most people are not musicians and musicians need an audience.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Sloe said:


> I have to disagree.
> *Many less known composers did write a lot of memorable tunes.*
> Regarding non-musicians most people are not musicians and musicians need an audience.


who? example please?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

brianvds said:


> I think there is a great deal of overlap in quality between various composers. *That is to say, surely some of Kraus' works are better than some of Haydn's or Mozart's.* Or perhaps I am now already strolling on thin ice here. But I would think that a mature symphony by Kraus would probably be a more satisfactory listening experience than a piece of juvenilia by Mozart.
> 
> I do notice once again the same thing I notice time and again with the lesser composers though: they lacked the ability to write memorable tunes. And here too I am probably toying with controversy. Perhaps many would argue that tunes are only important to non-musicians.


agreed - but Krauss's best work being better than an early mozart symphony does not make it worth listening to.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

I listened to the symphony in C minor VB142.
Good music - solid structure and lots of musical sense and direction - something that is missing in, for example - the music of Salieri.
I would say it is on par with some of the weaker of haydn's symphonies. It is probably as good as any Mozart symphony up to but not including no 24.

Oddly enough I let you tube continue after the Krauss symphony and I heard one of William Boyce's which I liked better


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Good to see Kraus is quite well rated judging by the statistical results.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Sloe said:


> I have to disagree.
> Many less known composers did write a lot of memorable tunes.


Yes, but they did not seem to be the kind of unlimited founts of good tunes like, say, Schubert. And it is noteworthy that very often, those lesser composers are known precisely for the one or few works that contain the good tunes.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

stomanek said:


> agreed - but Krauss's best work being better than an early mozart symphony does not make it worth listening to.


Perhaps, but lots of people will spend a great deal of time listening to Mozart's early symphonies, but not Kraus (or other similar Classical era figures). I like to explore the less famous figures a bit. Now and then you run into a real gem, and it creates a bit of context for Mozart and Haydn, who did not live in a vacuum containing nothing other than themselves.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

ArtMusic said:


> Good to see Kraus is quite well rated judging by the statistical results.


Got people talking for starters. :clap:


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

MarkW said:


> Don't they play him a lot at IKEA?





Pugg said:


> Not even remotely funny .


I disagree, I found that comment quite humorous!



Pugg said:


> Quit rightly said , as if only the bigger names produced fine music.


Of course not, but I think too many people, either because of wanting to hear something new, wanting to be "different" from the "herd," or wanting to appear more "broad" or "open-minded" will promote lesser composers as if they are as good as the "great" ones.

There IS a reason why certain names are considered "great" and why they always will be the "bigger" names.

V


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I think Stomanek's comment was well-taken. The music of Kraus is definitely of a higher order than that of, say, Salieri. And as far as symphonies go, I would place it higher than most of Mozart's contemporaries. No, he's no Haydn, and no Mozart either. But he's quite good.

Haydn no doubt overspoke in his comment about Kraus, but it's good to hear the music of somebody who was, actually, something of a standout in his time and whose music is still very fine.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Varick said:


> I disagree, I found that comment quite humorous!
> 
> Of course not, but I think too many people, either because of wanting to hear something new, wanting to be "different" from the "herd," or wanting to appear more "broad" or "open-minded" will promote lesser composers as if they are as good as the "great" ones.
> 
> ...


Completely wrong on all accounts .


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Pugg said:


> Completely wrong on all accounts .


Is it really?

You've never met a pretentious person pretending to be "superior" to the "masses?" I've met tons of them. You should get out more.

The greats are only considered "greats" by pure luck? Random picks out of a hat?

V


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Haydn no doubt overspoke in his comment about Kraus, but it's good to hear the music of somebody who was, actually, something of a standout in his time and whose music is still very fine.


Well, history is replete with such comments as Haydn's. Schumann was somewhat notorious for them. Fact is, you cannot really predict who will turn out to be the great ones until a century or so has passed.


----------



## Metairie Road (Apr 30, 2014)

Kraus, known as "The Swedish Mozart"?

By whom?

Is there a Chinese 'Mozart', or a Welsh 'Mozart'?

Would Kraus be flattered or pi$$ed off by this comparison?

Is Mozart the benchmark by which all other composers are to judged?

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

It's certainly an annoying thing.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Varick said:


> I disagree, I found that comment quite humorous!
> 
> Of course not, but I think too many people, either because of wanting to hear something new, wanting to be "different" from the "herd," or wanting to appear more "broad" or "open-minded" will promote lesser composers as if they are as good as the "great" ones.
> 
> ...


I disagree with Pugg and agree with you - of course one can never know for certain why forgotten composers are resurrected from the dust and trumped up as unjustly ignored geniuses. personally I have rarely found anything really special in the compositions of Krauss and a conservatoire full of disregarded music such as salieri's operas. A lot of it is attractive music, pleasant etc but not inspired - but if there are people around who really think CPE Bach's g minor symphony compares with Mozarts great G minor - good luck to them - there's plenty more where that came from to keep them happy.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Metairie Road said:


> Would Kraus be flattered or pi$$ed off by this comparison?


I often wonder about that same thing.

-Says I, The South African Van Gogh


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

I suspect that if there was a poll asking members to list their top, say, 20 composers the name Joseph Kraus would hardly appear, if at all. When aggregated across all voters, the name would at best crop up no more than a few times.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Genoveva said:


> I suspect that if there was a poll asking members to list their top, say, 20 composers the name Joseph Kraus would hardly appear, if at all. When aggregated across all voters, the name would at best crop up no more than a few times.


Probably yes. But people should not let this put them off too much. Kraus himself would quite possibly have been both delighted and incredulous to have known that more than two centuries after he composed his music, it would actually still be played here and there and find an appreciative if not exactly ecstatic audience.

How many people in any walk of life make a big enough splash to be remembered at all over the centuries. One could argue that Kraus was a spectacularly successful genius. Just not quite as great as some of his contemporaries.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Genoveva said:


> I suspect that if there was a poll asking members to list their top, say, 20 composers the name Joseph Kraus would hardly appear, if at all. When aggregated across all voters, the name would at best crop up no more than a few times.


Realistically speaking, I doubt he'd appear in many top 100s or even top 500s.
I always wonder how many "great composers" people think there are, and how many "good composers" for that matter.
As brianvds says, to have one's music listened to after two centuries is itself quite an achievement. I'm looking at a list of composers born in the 1750s: aside from Kraus and Mozart, there's Clementi, Salieri, Krommer, Pleyel, Viotti, Bortnyansky, Devienne, Reichardt, Rolla, Lebrun, Zelter, and many more most of us have heard little or no music by... perhaps it's fair simply to note that Kraus can be considered among the best of his immediate peers.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

brianvds said:


> Probably yes. But people should not let this put them off too much. *Kraus himself would quite possibly have been both delighted and incredulous to have known that more than two centuries after he composed his music, it would actually still be played here and there and find an appreciative if not exactly ecstatic audience. *
> 
> How many people in any walk of life make a big enough splash to be remembered at all over the centuries. One could argue that Kraus was a spectacularly successful genius. Just not quite as great as some of his contemporaries.


Perhaps - but we live in an era of recorded music overkill where record companies have played out the market and now need to sell music to those wanting something new - even if it's not much good. I can appreciate that as someone who listens mostly to Mozart and a group of half a dozen famous names - but the composers outside that group that impress me, bowl me over even when I suddenly hear something new to my ears (on the radio) tend to be Vaughn Williams, Shostakovich, Debussy, Elgar or another such master of considerable fame. I never hear something for the first time by a minor name and get that same buzz - usually I think well that's not bad or what's up next.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

brianvds said:


> Yes, but they did not seem to be the kind of unlimited founts of good tunes like, say, Schubert. And it is noteworthy that very often, those lesser composers are known precisely for the one or few works that contain the good tunes.


But it is the same with the more famous composers they are famous for a few works with a few memorable tunes.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Genoveva said:


> I suspect that if there was a poll asking members to list their top, say, 20 composers the name Joseph Kraus would hardly appear, if at all. When aggregated across all voters, the name would at best crop up no more than a few times.


This is more than partly because we are not pelted with his music on an ongoing basis and there are not ten zillion recordings of his work.

I rate him very highly. I enjoy what little of his music I have a bit better than most Mozart. I'd rank him just under Haydn. His music seems more timeless to me than either Haydn or Mozart, perhaps because he sounds sometimes a bit baroque, sometimes a bit romantic. And yes his themes are charming and memorable.


----------



## Genoveva (Nov 9, 2010)

> Genoveva said:
> 
> 
> > I suspect that if there was a poll asking members to list their top, say, 20 composers the name Joseph Kraus would hardly appear, if at all. When aggregated across all voters, the name would at best crop up no more than a few times.
> ...


I don't doubt that some of Kraus's better works are superior to many of the juvenile works of Mozart, and several of Haydn's early works. Taking the broad average of Kraus's better works, there is little doubt that they are inferior to the broad average of either Mozart's or Haydn's better works.

I wouldn't dispute that if there was a poll confined to favourite "classical era" composers it's possible that Joseph Kraus may appear in the top 25 somewhere. Guessing where is made difficult because it partly depends on how the "classical era" is defined.

Taking a broad definition, including "galante" and "rococo" styles at the beginning, there were several well regarded composers: C P E Bach, J C Bach, Boyce, Gluck, Pergolesi, Sammartini, Domenico Scarlatti, Soler, Johan Stamitz.

The most well known names from the central classical period from around 1750-1825 included the likes of Beethoven, Boccherini, Cimarosa, Dittersdorf, Dussek, Joseph Haydn, Michael Haydn, Hummel, Mozart, Myslivecek, Kraus, Salieri.

And then there was a late classical-romantic crossover period which included composers like Cherubini, Clementi, Czerny, Field, Paganani, Rossini, Schubert, Weber.

It's clear that the classical era field as a whole is dominated by Beethoven, Haydn, Mozart, and Schubert. After these I would guess that names like C P E Bach, J C Bach, Boccherini, Scarlatti, Rossini, and Weber would probably appear above that of Kraus. In a wider poll, covering all periods, it's likely that there would be a big gap before any of these other names appeared.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

So I finally decided to try mr. Kraus and found the complete symphonies on spotify. I could listen to this all day! Just the way I like it (sometimes).


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Excellent, what a good discovery for you!


----------



## Myriadi (Mar 6, 2016)

I really adore the E major piano sonata, particularly in Brautigam's version - sadly unavailable on Youtube. But here's a sensitive, beautiful clavichord performance:






That second movement stayed with me right since the first time I've heard it. And just look at that finale - a massive variations cycle with so many unpredictable twists and turns... The narrative drive is so strong here, it's impossible not to fall in love! Anyway, that's what I think. This sonata is to me certainly among the very best of the period, absolutely on par with any piano pieces by Haydn or Mozart.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

What lovely good music!


----------



## joeroberts (Jul 16, 2016)

Hi all (first post).

I listened to Kraus about a year ago, specifically his ballet music on Naxos. I have yet to re-listen to the album, but among those I found the *Pantomime in D Major *and *The Fishermen *(especially the finale) to be worth while. The former sounds a bit _Sturm und Drang_-ish. The other Pantomime is cool too.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Welcome to TalkClassical , and welcome to recognizing Kraus!


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

I am listening to his symphonies as we speak and I like what I'm hearing. I wonder how much his music points to, say, that of Berwald, himself quite ahead of his time. 

Must explore further.


----------



## Joachim Raff (Jan 31, 2020)

He is a major discovery for me. Haydn rated this guy highly. I can see why. The music is so approachable. What stands this guy out from other Mozart Contemporaries is the engagement of the listener. I find myself entrenched into the music in a way that is hard to explain. What a talent!


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

I rate him highly , He made some wonderful music , certainly not boring. In fact I am going to spin something later from him .


----------

