# Classical music hits (aka popular classics), underrated or not?



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

For the general public, these works (such as Symphony no. 40, Radetsky March, Für Elise, Eine Kleine Nachtmusik, Moonlight sonata, Blue Danube, O Fortuna, etc...) are pretty much the only works of classical music they know.

For people into classical music, these works have probably fallen into disfavor due to overexposure, over-familiarity and all the cliches connected with them. So I guess they might be underrated among the classical music fans.

But then, here's something interesting:

I'll try to compare a strong non-hit piece with a hit piece and try to explain how I look at it. Let's take 2 Mozart symphonies.

A very strong non-hit piece is Mozart's Symphony n. 41. This is by far my favorite Mozart symphony. All the movements are strong and interesting, and the work as a whole is almost overwhelming. The last movement brings tension to a very high level, and listening to the whole work certainly is very mentally stimulating.

On the other hand Mozart's Symphony n. 40 is a hit piece. As a whole work it's good, but not as strong as Symphony n. 41. I enjoy it, but I don't get that overwhelmed, I don't get that stimulated. But there is something about the opening movement of the 40th symphony that simply does not exist in non-hit pieces such as Symphony n. 41. There is that famous part that kind of feels different from anything else, and feels so real, so authentic, so iconic, as if this is the only real music in the piece, with all the rest just being a filler.

From this point of view the whole Symphony n. 41 is just a filler. Because it lacks any part which feels so real, so transcendent, so authentic... I still prefer it very much to Symphony n. 40, and the whole work is much more satisfying than Symphony n. 40. But when I compare it with that short famous, iconic part of the 40th, the whole symphony feels like a filler. Like, yes, very high quality music, great development, great emotion, passion... but it lacks those highly meaningful parts that are remembered forever on the very first listen, and that feel like they have always existed and haven't been composed, but just discovered.

I thought perhaps it's just the question of exposure. Perhaps I simply heard that famous part of the Symphony no. 40 so many times, that it found its residence in the deepest parts of my unconscious mind.

But maybe, there's more to it than just hearing it that many times. Truth to be told, since as a whole I prefer symphony n. 41, I've heard it many more times than the 40th.

But no matter how many times I hear symphony n. 41, no part of it ever feels that iconic as the famous part of Symphony n. 40.

Now there's another thing... even within a famous, hit-piece, there seems to be a sharp and very noticeable boundary between the famous, iconic part, and the rest of the piece. And in comparison to the iconic part, the rest of the piece feels like just a filler... something you gotta listen in order to get the real treat, that is, the famous part.

It can be exemplified in Youtube comments, when people say things like: "... I hope you didn't come just for, say 12:34, but listened to the whole piece"

Or "I came for 7:55, but I stayed for the whole piece... fantastic"

Indeed the famous parts seem like the only real deal in comparison to everything else, and everything else feels like filler in comparison.

But, since you can't listen to just famous parts, and since they are very short, eventually you get bored of them and they feel like cliche, and you look for the whole work, and for the less familiar works, etc...

But the truth is, IMO, it's simply due to inability of composers to maintain such high quality, throughout the work, which lasts, say, 30 minutes, that we have very few works that are iconic in their entirety, and for that same reason, we are also learning to appreciate less familiar parts as well. 

But I guess, if a composer managed to maintain such level throughout the work, such a work would easily become among the best ever written.

Now I am wondering, among classical music fans, do you agree that these famous works are perhaps underrated due to cliches, overexposure and stereotypes, or they are given their right credit?

Should we try perhaps to get a deeper understanding about how this magic works... is it just luck? Or perhaps some trick? Or deliberate intention to make some parts catchy?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I think sym. 41 is definitely a "hit piece" and have no clue why you don't.


----------



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

41st is rated higher among the best ever pieces, but for the general public it's not a hit.
40th, is not as highly rated, but it's definitely a hit.

I personally prefer 41st, but I acknowledge that it doesn't have that something that has made the 40th a part of collective unconscious.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I have no idea what the "famous part" of No. 40 is, but find the first movement whiny so haven't listened to it in years. As for the rest, I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. There are a lot of reasons why famous sections or over-exposed pieces are -- but quality, or lack thereof, is only one of many.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I think I always preferred Mozart's K 550 to 551, certainly not the other way round (and K 504 as well which is my favorite Mozart symphony). 
The only extraordinary movement of the Jupiter is the finale (and I think even this is a bit overrated, compared e.g. to the finale of the piano concerto K 459 that has similar counterpoint tricks but is funny and witty on top of it). The slow movement is very good but not superior to the other late symphonies (or several piano concertos) and I don't find the first movement and the menuet all that remarkable.
But this is quibbling as they are both very good pieces that have been justly famous since a long time, i.e. if you go from single movement samplers to "best of Mozart" collections that have whole works, you will certainly find both symphonies. 
Overall the "classical hits" are a very inhomogeneous bunch. They obviously share at least the quality of being catchy but not much else. 
They need to be put in perspective. Eine kleine Nachtmusik is a perfectly fine little serenade but not on the scale or sophistication of a late Mozart symphony. Für Elise is also a pretty good piece (I accidentally listened to it a few weeks ago on a disc of lesser/shorter Beethoven pieces and was surprised how good it is with nice contrasting sections etc. but it is called "album leaf", that is hardly more than a musical sketch or "visiting card". And so on.


----------



## KevinJS (Sep 24, 2021)

Popularity might simply indicate that a particular piece was used in a movie/cartoon, or whatever. It is said that the definition of an intellectual is someone who can listen to the William Tell Overture without thinking of the Lone Ranger.


----------



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

Here's good choice of popular classical for those who are interested in delving deeper into reasons for their popularity:


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

ZJovicic said:


> 41st is rated higher among the best ever pieces, but for the general public it's not a hit.
> *40th, is not as highly rated*, but it's definitely a hit.
> 
> I personally prefer 41st, but I acknowledge that it doesn't have that something that has made the 40th a part of collective unconscious.


That's really not correct. The 40th is so highly regarded, so perfect, that it ranks among the greatest artistic achievements ever. There are some works that are held in such high regard that they only need to be mentioned by nickname and everyone in the field knows what you're talking about. Like "the Ninth". In this case "the G-minor symphony". The two symphonies are both extraordinary creations, but the 40th is sublime.


----------



## chipia (Apr 22, 2021)

mbhaub said:


> That's really not correct. The 40th is so highly regarded, so perfect, that it ranks among the greatest artistic achievements ever. There are some works that are held in such high regard that they only need to be mentioned by nickname and everyone in the field knows what you're talking about. Like "the Ninth". In this case "the G-minor symphony". The two symphonies are both extraordinary creations, but the 40th is sublime.


I think this thread is not about compositions highly regarded by people "in the field" but by the general public, that's why it's called "popular classics". Most people know the first theme of the 40th Symphony, but they usually don't even know what it's called.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

ZJovicic said:


> Here's good choice of popular classical for those who are interested in delving deeper into reasons for their popularity:


That Top 65 is totally a marketing ploy and has tenuous basis in reality.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

mbhaub said:


> That's really not correct. The 40th is so highly regarded, so perfect, that it ranks among the greatest artistic achievements ever. There are some works that are held in such high regard that they only need to be mentioned by nickname and everyone in the field knows what you're talking about. Like "the Ninth". In this case "the G-minor symphony". The two symphonies are both extraordinary creations, but the 40th is sublime.


Interestingly, I wonder if Mozart's first G-minor symphony (No. 25) is better known. The film, Amadeus, begins with that symphony, and I'm guessing that more people today have heard that music than Symphony No. 40. But yes, Mozart's 40th is rated quite highly with good reason. In the TC polls the 41st was 4th and the 40th was 6th.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

The first theme or first minute or so of K 550 was used by de los Rios in a disgusting pop version in the 70s or 80s and it has been rather well known since then, even a ringtone, I believe. I don't think the brief use of the little g minor in Amadeus has had more impact. After all, not many under 40 not already interested in classical music or 1980s cinema will have seen Amadeus.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

ZJovicic said:


> 41st is rated higher among the best ever pieces, but for the general public it's not a hit.
> 40th, is not as highly rated, but it's definitely a hit.
> 
> I personally prefer 41st, but I acknowledge that it doesn't have that something that has made the 40th a part of collective unconscious.


The 41st is famous among the general public. It is commonly found on CDs with Symphony No. 40.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Kreisler jr said:


> The first theme or first minute or so of K 550 was used by de los Rios in a disgusting pop version in the 70s or 80s and it has been rather well known since then, even a ringtone, I believe. I don't think the brief use of the little g minor in Amadeus has had more impact. After all, not many under 40 not already interested in classical music or 1980s cinema will have seen Amadeus.


That's interesting. I've never heard of that pop version. I suppose more people could have heard that than Amadeus.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

I am not going to answer the poll, because the 41st is one of the warhorses. The only difference between the 40th and the 41st in popularity is that the 40th has one theme which EVERYONE knows. The rest of the symphony is less well-known among the general public. Most would not recognize the Minuet of the 40th, despite it being known to all who like classical music.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Btw, a lot of threads ZJovicic has made on this forum are about making strange comparisons between classical music and non-classical music, and justifications to "prove" the value of certain non-classical music he appreciates.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I think so, yes.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Symphony 40, Moonlight Sonata, Toccata and Fugue, Eine Kliene Nachtmusik, Fur Elise, Minuet in G, ride off the back of their composers. The question that should be asked, and that has been asked is, is Tchaikovsky underrated.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

On a related note to the OP, I feel like I'm the only one who really likes Chopin's Piano Concertos. I guess they're not as popular on this forum as they are elsewhere. I say it's related to the OP because there's not a lot 'going on' per se linearly in these types of works, and yet I still think they're magnificently composed. Maybe in some of these popular works there's a lot more going on underneath the surface than what's given credit for. There's great form and melody. I think I tend to grasp form easier than most members.

This is coming from someone who gets criticized for not liking a lot of early romanticism. That's not true, I may just enjoy a different version of romanticism from you. For instance, Rachmaninoff is extremely more popular elsewhere.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Asking whether something is _overrated_ or _underrated_ is always kinda difficult, if not impossible, to answer, especially for such a broad topic covering so many different pieces.

Personally, I find most of these popular classics to be at the very least catchy and fun, or moving if it's a moody piece, which are all fine qualities. Although it's rare that I'll have a cathartic experience with these works, sometimes they're totally awesome and just fitting the situation. It goes without saying that some pieces are better than others.

My favorite music? No, hardly. But I would never take away their creative merits and the ability to engage the general listener and myself, so *I* don't underrate them. I can't answer for others without better data.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

I would say there is a certain segment of classical listeners that dislike every classical piece that has wormed its way into the popular imagination simply because said piece wormed its way into the popular imagination. Thus, I voted yes.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Ethereality said:


> On a related note to the OP, I feel like I'm the only one who really likes Chopin's Piano Concertos. I guess they're not as popular on this forum as they are elsewhere. I say it's related to the OP because there's not a lot 'going on' per se linearly in these types of works, and yet I still think they're magnificently composed. Maybe in some of these popular works there's a lot more going on underneath the surface than what's given credit for. There's great form and melody. I think I tend to grasp form easier than most members.
> 
> This is coming from someone who gets criticized for not liking a lot of early romanticism. That's not true, I may just enjoy a different version of romanticism from you. For instance, Rachmaninoff is extremely more popular elsewhere.


I like the Second Piano Concerto.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

Ethereality said:


> On a related note to the OP, I feel like I'm the only one who really likes Chopin's Piano Concertos. I guess they're not as popular on this forum as they are elsewhere.


The Chopin concertos are still very popular elsewhere and frequently performed and recorded. Often a forum is dominated by two dozen contributors or so, and some fora are more pianophile, some more operaphile, some have a focus on orchestral spectacular (or at least late romantic/early modern) etc.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

ZJovicic said:


> For the general public, these works (such as Symphony no. 40, Radetsky March, Für Elise, Eine Kleine Nachtmusik, Moonlight sonata, Blue Danube, O Fortuna, etc...) are pretty much the only works of classical music they know.


I am not sure the popularity of the piece with casual listeners who generally don't do classical music matters to me. I know the start of Mozart 40 is popular (and often available as a ringtone) but that doesn't stop me loving the piece or persuade me I need to compare it with 41 or anything else. I love the Moonlight sonata - the popularity of some of it doesn't stop that - and Fur Elise. I am not so thrilled by the Radetsky March or the Blue Danube but that has nothing to do with their popularity or hearing them too often (in fact, I haven't heard them that much). I don't have a problem with Eine Kleine Nachtmusik: it is what it is (not profound or great but pleasant enough). As for O Fortuna, I had to look it up! I dislike any Orff that I have heard but I don't think its popularity has much to do with that: indeed, its use in popular culture helps me make some sense of its value.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

ZJovicic said:


> Now I am wondering, among classical music fans, do you agree that these famous works are perhaps underrated


Yes.


ZJovicic said:


> Should we try perhaps to get a deeper understanding about how this magic works...


Yes. It is very important. We should study this magic instead of some overcomplicated atonalism as a building block for a superior future music better than anything before.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Also, usually people don't talk about movements or moments on this forum, but that's where a lot of the 'hit' or 'iconic' material pronounces itself. Everyone remembers and can dance to this one, even if it lacks melody. It has a clear theme and characteristic. Can a 40 minute work be a 'hit'? I'm not too sure. Uematsu is probably the _Mozart_ of hit movements, by that I mean unlike Mozart, all of his less-popular tracks are extremely iconic and different, but they're also extremely melodic. Though you never hear about those, because modern-day composers don't get remembered for their most lasting qualities. Maybe in 50 years his other music will be remembered more than his 'fanbase' stuff.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

How can a "hit" be underrated?


----------



## chipia (Apr 22, 2021)

dissident said:


> How can a "hit" be underrated?


The poll asks if they are underrated _among classical music fans_. The music can be a hit with the general public, but still be underrated by specific groups of people, i.e. classical musicians.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

chipia said:


> The poll asks if they are underrated _among classical music fans_. The music can be a hit with the general public, but still be underrated by specific groups of people, i.e. classical musicians.


Ah, ok. I say "not underrated" then. Some things are "overplayed" though, like...


OP said:


> On the other hand Mozart's Symphony n. 40 is a hit piece. As a whole work it's good, but not as strong as Symphony n. 41. I enjoy it, but I don't get that overwhelmed, I don't get that stimulated. But there is something about the opening movement of the 40th symphony that simply does not exist in non-hit pieces such as Symphony n. 41. There is that famous part that kind of feels different from anything else, and feels so real, so authentic, so iconic, as if this is the only real music in the piece, with all the rest just being a filler.


Mozart's 40th isn't really a favorite of mine. The "iconic" movement in that one to me is the second.


----------

