# Comparison between Schubert and Mozart.



## peeyaj

These two incredibly talented Austrian composers are some of the greatest in history.

Even though Schubert admired Beethoven, I believe that Schubert has a more kinship to Mozart than him.

If I'm going to compare the both two..

a. Both are gifted with incredible talent with melody. They are some of the greatest melodists in history.

b. Both died incredibly young, Mozart at 36 and Schubert at 31.

c. They composed their geatest masterpieces at their respective genre at the end of their lives. Mozart's last three symphonies numbered 39, 40 and 41 and Schubert's piano sonatas D.958, D.959 and D.960.

What do you think?


----------



## Polednice

I think Schubert is wearing those glasses upside down.


----------



## peeyaj

And they both died penniless..


----------



## smoledman

Poor Schubert died of crotch rot.


----------



## Ukko

There is no useful comparison.


----------



## Muddy

Hello, I just discovered this great forum! I have been listening to Classical music like a madman for over 30 years. It is great to find a site populated with other enthusiasts. 

I have recently been listening to a lot of Schubert and my opinion of his music has been steadily rising. But that said, I don't think he can duke it out with Mozart. IMO, only Bach and Beethoven belong in the same ring as Mozart, and only Bach beats him. Mozart was arguably the greatest opera composer of all time. Schubert wrote none. Mozart was the supreme composer of piano concertos. Schubert wrote none. Mozart penned several incredible symphonies. Schubert wrote 2...maybe 3. Ok, 3. I concede that Schubert's piano compositions compare favorably with Mozart's. I prefer Schubert's final three sonatas over any of Mozart's sonatas, and the impromptus are fabulous. Schubert's great chamber works are fantastic, but Mozart wrote quartets, trios, and quintets just as fabulous, and a lot more of them. Without question, of course, Schubert wins hands down in the composition of lieder.

This is not to dismiss Schubert in any way. I love his music. And who knows what would have happened had he lived 5 more years. Or 10. Or 20. But the same can be said of Mozart. Had Mozart lived to be as old as Haydn...the thought boggles the mind! For me, at the moment, Schubert is the 4th greatest composer. He just edged Haydn out and into 5th.


----------



## Guest

For me I find Schubert more lyrical than Mozart and really prefer his Symphonies, and surly if we are going to bring LvB into the equation then his are by far the best Sonatas, I am not going to get into a [email protected]@dy argument over this as It is IMO. :tiphat::tiphat:


----------



## peeyaj

Andante said:


> For me I find Schubert more lyrical than Mozart and really prefer his Symphonies, and surly if we are going to bring LvB into the equation then his are by far the best Sonatas, I am not going to get into a [email protected]@dy argument over this as It is IMO. :tiphat::tiphat:


I think if *Mozart and Schubert* will combine against *Beethoven*, they would won.


----------



## Xaltotun

Mozart has more of an enlightenment mentality, objectivity... "this is how the world is". Schubert is more intimate, but then again, Schubert is more intimate than pretty much any other composer. Schubert is more tender and fragile. There is a certain subtle hardness that I percieve in Mozart. Like a fist clothed in velvet. Schubert is mystical and inward, Mozart is revelatory. Both are great composers but I prefer Schubert.


----------



## Kieran

Mozart didn't die penniless.

He was 35.

And his last three symphs weren't at the end of his life, relatively speaking. 

But these are my two favourite composers. I love the naturalness of their music, the fluidity and depth. I'd like to listen to Schubert a bit more than I do, because his song cycles are so many things at once, and in chamber music and symphs he stands as tall as anyone.

I wouldn't compare them, however. There are similarities in their great facilities, but they wrote for different reasons and they both wrote very different music...


----------



## Avey

Entirely arbitrary note: Schubert's 4th Symphony could mask as a Mozart work. More apparently than others, at least.


----------



## Jukka

Muddy said:


> Hello, I just discovered this great forum! I have been listening to Classical music like a madman for over 30 years. It is great to find a site populated with other enthusiasts.
> 
> I have recently been listening to a lot of Schubert and my opinion of his music has been steadily rising. But that said, I don't think he can duke it out with Mozart. IMO, only Bach and Beethoven belong in the same ring as Mozart, and only Bach beats him. Mozart was arguably the greatest opera composer of all time. Schubert wrote none. Mozart was the supreme composer of piano concertos. Schubert wrote none. Mozart penned several incredible symphonies. Schubert wrote 2...maybe 3. Ok, 3. I concede that Schubert's piano compositions compare favorably with Mozart's. I prefer Schubert's final three sonatas over any of Mozart's sonatas, and the impromptus are fabulous. Schubert's great chamber works are fantastic, but Mozart wrote quartets, trios, and quintets just as fabulous, and a lot more of them. Without question, of course, Schubert wins hands down in the composition of lieder.


No offence, but your facts are wrong. Schubert wrote SEVERAL operas. Many experts think that they are fantastic in terms of music, but the drama and libretto parts are not that great. More than 3 of his symphones are consired to be outstanding (I personally love 2th, 4th, 5th, 8th and 9th), and his late symphonies (8,9) are probably even more innovative and groundbreaking than Mozarts 39-41. Schubert was perhaps the very first romantic composer with his late symphonies, and he really opened new doors with his music. By the way; if Mozart would have died at the same age than Schubert did, there would NOT be many of Mozarts masterpieces: there woudn't be Don Giovanni, Magic Flute, great G minor symphony, "Jupiter symphony" or Clarinet concerto or Requiem. There wouldn't be many of his piano concertos either.

I personally think that Schubert is the best composer of all time, espicially if you take into account that he died at the age og 31. He wrote so many works in chamber music, orchetral music, piano music and vocal music (wonderful church music!), that gives people joy. He was fast and always was able to maintain high quality.


----------



## Pugg

Jukka said:


> No offence, but your facts are wrong. Schubert wrote SEVERAL operas. Many experts think that they are fantastic in terms of music, but the drama and libretto parts are not that great. More than 3 of his symphones are consired to be outstanding (I personally love 2th, 4th, 5th, 8th and 9th), and his late symphonies (8,9) are probably even more innovative and groundbreaking than Mozarts 39-41. Schubert was perhaps the very first romantic composer with his late symphonies, and he really opened new doors with his music. By the way; if Mozart would have died at the same age than Schubert did, there would NOT be many of Mozarts masterpieces: there woudn't be Don Giovanni, Magic Flute, great G minor symphony, "Jupiter symphony" or Clarinet concerto or Requiem. There wouldn't be many of his piano concertos either.
> 
> I personally think that Schubert is the best composer of all time, espicially if you take into account that he died at the age og 31. He wrote so many works in chamber music, orchetral music, piano music and vocal music (wonderful church music!), that gives people joy. He was fast and always was able to maintain high quality.


As right as you are I doubt this member will see this answer as it dates from 2012 .


----------



## Euler

Jukka said:


> By the way; if Mozart would have died at the same age than Schubert did, there would NOT be many of Mozarts masterpieces: there woudn't be Don Giovanni, Magic Flute, great G minor symphony, "Jupiter symphony" or Clarinet concerto or Requiem. There wouldn't be many of his piano concertos either.


Mozart was 30 when he wrote the 25th piano concerto: we'd lose only the last 2. He completed Don Giovanni at 31 and 9 months (Schubert died at 31 and 10 months). To imply Mozart wrote few masterpieces before late 1787 is quite amusing, though I suppose it's all a matter of taste.
For the record I adore Schubert--we can have both without churlish comparisons.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

They were both short.


----------



## jdec

Euler said:


> Mozart was 30 when he wrote the 25th piano concerto: we'd lose only the last 2. *He completed Don Giovanni at 31 and 9 months* (Schubert died at 31 and 10 months). *To imply Mozart wrote few masterpieces before late 1787 is quite amusing*, though I suppose it's all a matter of taste.
> For the record I adore Schubert--we can have both without churlish comparisons.


Agree. Also, he was 30 years old when he completed _The Marriage of Figaro_. 27 when he composed the Great Mass in C minor. 23 when he finished the Sinfonia Concertante. Of course, there are a lot more masterpieces he composed younger than 31. And I adore Schubert too.


----------



## SONNET CLV

Mozart and Schubert have long ranked as favorites of mine. I tend to think of Schubert as a continuation of Mozart, perhaps as one who writes music the way Mozart may have written it had he known the influence of Beethoven. I lament the early deaths of both, but I perhaps secretly wish that Schubert could have had more years. He probably would have turned into Bruckner. Bruckner I always view as a continuation of Schubert moreso than of any other composer -- a Schubert who knew the music of Wagner. But such thoughts and conjectures remain only that, and very personal considerations as well.

I remained puzzled by Schubert's music for many many years. I was always struck by how mature the music seemed, almost like music written by an elderly person who understood well life's trials. Yet Schubert was but young. A mystery always to me. I recall years ago thinking that perhaps when I was older I would better understand Schubert's music. Now that I am I take on Schubert with a new relish, and I do believe I comprehend much more, especially in those late piano sonatas. The man's vision (and mind) was vast, too vast for mine to follow coherently. Yet, I certainly do appreciate much more Schubert nowadays than I could when I was youthful.

With Mozart I remain always struck by the magic of his imagination. Each piece seems endowed with a sense of the miraculous. But the music seldom troubles me as does that of Schubert. I cannot remember feeling dazed and confused after hearing a string quartet by Mozart. I seldom have any real grasp of what I just heard after hearing a string quartet by Schubert.

I shall continue my exploration of both these composers, even though I have heard nearly all of their published music via recordings or in concert. Mozart I explore to keep experiencing the magic; Schubert astounds with his sense of awe. Mozart delights me; Schubert awes me. I think that to understand Schubert fully I will comprehend the essence of life's meaning itself. And that's magical, too.


----------



## Mandryka

Schubert the more challenging composer of the two, with these very repetitious and very long pieces, the 9th symphony, the 15th quartet, the sonata D 840 etc


----------



## Genoveva

Jukka said:


> No offence, but your facts are wrong. Schubert wrote SEVERAL operas. Many experts think that they are fantastic in terms of music, but the drama and libretto parts are not that great. More than 3 of his symphones are consired to be outstanding (I personally love 2th, 4th, 5th, 8th and 9th), and his late symphonies (8,9) are probably even more innovative and groundbreaking than Mozarts 39-41. Schubert was perhaps the very first romantic composer with his late symphonies, and he really opened new doors with his music. By the way; if Mozart would have died at the same age than Schubert did, there would NOT be many of Mozarts masterpieces: there woudn't be Don Giovanni, Magic Flute, great G minor symphony, "Jupiter symphony" or Clarinet concerto or Requiem. There wouldn't be many of his piano concertos either.
> 
> I personally think that Schubert is the best composer of all time, espicially if you take into account that he died at the age og 31. He wrote so many works in chamber music, orchetral music, piano music and vocal music (wonderful church music!), that gives people joy. He was fast and always was able to maintain high quality.


As has already been pointed out, the post you have picked up here is 6 years old, so it's unlikely you'll get a response from the member who posted it as he hasn't been seen around here for a long time.

In fact, Schubert is a very highly regarded composer at this Forum (and no doubt most other classical music forums as well). In the various favourite composer polls that have been carried out here over the past 7-8 years, Schubert was placed just behind Beethoven, Bach, Mozart, and vied with Brahms in either 4th or 5th spot. That's a highly creditable achievement for someone who died so young, when you look at some of the very famous names lower down the popularity league.

Ever since I first took up an interest in classical music I have greatly liked Schubert. I find it almost impossible to say which of the composers referred to above I now like the most, as they're all different. Among his large number of works there are many glorious pieces of outstanding maturity and quality. I do like Schubert's late works especially.

On the matter of the difference in the ages of these composers at their deaths, it's often said that Schubert is somewhat under-rated because he died so much younger than the others. I think this view is probably valid to an extent, but what matter for many people is what a composer actually achieved, not what they might have achieved under different circumstances. For me Schubert is not under-rated at all because I like all the more the many great works that he was able to turn out in his (too) short life.

By way of example, much as I admire Beethoven's piano sonatas, I think that Schubert's last three sonatas are better than the best three of Beethoven's. I'm not suggesting that Schubert's are in any way better technically than Beethoven's. They're just better all round in my humble opinion.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Schubert was prone to rambling in his music in my opinion. He has some great moments, but tends not to develop them enough to justify the length. His last sonata first movement is the best example of this. In this case even the subject is not that interesting or lyrical to me, but it gets overblown to gross proportions, like a children’s song repeated many times with slight variation.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Jukka said:


> No offence, but your facts are wrong. Schubert wrote SEVERAL operas. Many experts think that they are fantastic in terms of music, but the drama and libretto parts are not that great. More than 3 of his symphones are consired to be outstanding (I personally love 2th, 4th, 5th, 8th and 9th), and his late symphonies (8,9) are probably even more innovative and groundbreaking than Mozarts 39-41. Schubert was perhaps the very first romantic composer with his late symphonies, and he really opened new doors with his music. *By the way; if Mozart would have died at the same age than Schubert did, there would NOT be many of Mozarts masterpieces:* there woudn't be Don Giovanni, Magic Flute, great G minor symphony, "Jupiter symphony" or Clarinet concerto or Requiem. There wouldn't be many of his piano concertos either.
> 
> I personally think that Schubert is the best composer of all time, espicially if you take into account that he died at the age og 31. He wrote so many works in chamber music, orchetral music, piano music and vocal music (wonderful church music!), that gives people joy. He was fast and always was able to maintain high quality.


I think you need to do some serious research before making a claim of this magnitude.

the vast majority of Mozart's great works were composed before 31.


----------



## Genoveva

Jukka said:


> ... By the way; if Mozart would have died at the same age than Schubert did, there would NOT be many of Mozarts masterpieces: there woudn't be Don Giovanni, Magic Flute, great G minor symphony, "Jupiter symphony" or Clarinet concerto or Requiem. There wouldn't be many of his piano concertos either.


If Mozart had died at the same age as Schubert, that would take us up to the end of 1787, and therefore exclude all compositions from early 1788 to the end of 1791. This means that works K 533- K 626 would not have been written. [I assume a sudden death, with no time to adjust the order of works].

The most significant of these compositions are:

Symphony	 
Symphonies: Nos 39, 40, 41

Concerto	 
Piano Concerto: Nos 26, 27 
Clarinet Concerto

Opera	 
Cosi fan Tutte 
The Magic Flute 
La Clemenza di Tito

Sacred Works
Requiem
Ave Verum Corpus (motet)

Chamber
Clarinet Quintet
String Quintet: Nos 5, 6
Piano Trio: Nos 4, 5, 6
String Quartet: Nos 21, 22, 23
String Trio: Divertimento K 563

Piano Works
Piano Sonata: Nos 15, 16, 17, 18​Some of these works are more important than others in assessing Mozart's overall rating (or popularity, call it what you will). In order to gain a fix on these, I've had a look at the relevant TC "Recommended Works" lists that have been produced over a number of years, and set out in a section of this Forum.

From those lists, it would seem that the biggest detrimental impacts would result from the loss of: Clarinet Concerto, Requiem, Symphonies 40, 41, The Magic Flute. Each of these featured in the top 10 of their relevant lists. Below these are Cosi fan Tutte, Symphony No 39, Piano Concerto No 27. Yet further down is Piano Trio No 5, and the motet Ave Verum Corpus. All the others are either very much lower down or not listed at all.

Even without these specific works, Mozart would still be a highly popular composer, as he wrote many outstanding others in the same genres by the end of 1787. It's debateable how far the loss of these post 1787 works might affect his status in terms of overall popularity. It's highly theoretical but in my opinion it seems likely that it would make the comparison between Mozart and Schubert more marginal. I stress that I'm only talking about relative popularity amongst the likes of people who tend to congregate in forums such as this one. I'm not making any bold claims about either composer's respective level of "greatness", "genius", "innovation" etc.


----------



## PlaySalieri

In a way it is futile to pit Mozart and Schubert against each other - as Schubert fans, from what I can gather on this forum - are also big Mozart fans.


----------



## Genoveva

stomanek said:


> In a way it is futile to pit Mozart and Schubert against each other - as Schubert fans, from what I can gather on this forum - are also big Mozart fans.


It's also true that many Mozart fans are Beethoven fans, and vice versa. Yet it doesn't stop people making comparisons between them and saying who they like the best.

There appears to be much less discussion involving J S Bach in comparison with Beethoven and Mozart. Probably that's because Bach's music, coming from the late baroque era, is so different from that of Beethoven and Mozart. In that respect, the music of Bach is far more likely to be viewed as being complementary to that of Beethoven and Mozart.

There is a much closer overlap between the music of Mozart and Beethoven, and their composing abilities were broadly similar, so therefore it might appear that there is greater scope for critical comparisons to be made. Personally, I don't see it that way. Mozart is clearly the epitome of the late classical style, and wrote music with such beauty and elegance that is unsurpassed in respect of these qualities in my opinion. Beethoven stayed with the same classical style for a long while but made it sound different, often involving a more dynamic and forward thrusting style, and yet everything remaining highly polished and finessed. Later on he began to move things into more into "romantic" directions. For these reasons, I don't see them as competitors but rather as compllementary to each other, and like them both almost equally.

Similarly, Schubert ('Schwammerl') wrote mainly partly in the classical style and partly in the romantic style. And yet his music is much closer in broad style to that of Mozart, and almost nothing like that of Beethoven. Schubert therefore offers yet a further dimension to the late classical/early romantic style, and did so in a way that I find very pleasing. All in all I cannot really say which of any these, Bach included, I like the best.


----------

