 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: rbell96
Date: 2004-01-27 18:45
I have been practicing my excerpts recently and it has got me thinking. Why are the Beethoven symphonies so important in the repertoire? What did Beethoven develop that Mozart had not?
Rob
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ralph G
Date: 2004-01-27 19:06
He was the bridge between the ordered, structured forms of the classical period and the breaking free of those boundaries with the more intensely emotional, epic-like works of the romantic era. Each of his nine symphonies represents an evolution, each one more groundbreaking than the one before it. By the Ninth, an entirely new musical order was in place than the one Mozart left behind. The fact that most of them have noteworthly clarinet parts makes them indespensible to the clarinet repertoire.
Or at least that's what I told my music history prof 13 years ago. She gave me a B.
Anyone who got an A, please chime in.r
________________
Artistic talent is a gift from God and whoever discovers it in himself has a certain obligation: to know that he cannot waste this talent, but must develop it.
- Pope John Paul II
Post Edited (2004-01-27 19:17)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Micaela
Date: 2004-01-27 19:18
Books and books have been written about this subject. But I can't resist taking a stab. Here are a few important things that I immediately think of:
1. Length! Beethoven symphonies are much more ambitious and extended than Mozart's.
2. Harmony. Beethoven is considerably more adventurous when it comes to frequent modulation and use of unusual chords.
3. Emotional Range. Beethoven's symphonies go through many, many extremes of mood. I'm not saying that Mozart's unemotional, but Beethoven is, as with my previous points, MORE so. He is much less restrained.
4. Formal innovation. Beethoven wasn't the first to use the scherzo but buried the Mozart minuet. He trashes the last remnants of the dance convention in favor of a rapid and boisterous movement. He also used counterpoint in a way most classical composers wouldn't touch (excepting the last movement of Jupiter). He even made a theme and variations movement in symphony (no. 3) and didn't even start with the theme! Beethoven's sonata form is much less predictable than Mozart. Referring back to No. 3, look at the opening- just two assertive chords and the melody in the cellos. There's a new theme in the middle of the development. Right before the recap in the same movement, look at the horn entrance. You think it's going to start recapping there, but it doesn't for a few more measures. Mozart would probably never have done any of this (though Haydn would have loved the fake out recap).
5. Orchestral size and power. Beethoven can be very loud. He also used many more instruments than Mozart- Mozart only used clarinets in some of his symphonies and usually only 2 horns. The string sections also tended to be much larger by Beethoven's time.
6. Formal innovation, part II. Beethoven was one of the first composers to make his movements part of a distinctive whole. I know all Mozart's movements fit together emotionally and all that but Beethoven actually employed harmonic and thematic links. Look at the Ninth Symphony for motive connection (a practice Dvorak copied in his Ninth) and (lack of a) cadence at the end of the 2nd movement of the Waldstein Sonata. On a deeper level, look at what Beethoven does with d minor through the whole Ninth.
6. All nine are great music. Beethoven did advance significantly from Mozart but even if he hadn't, they'd still be wonderful works.
This is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, but I hope it helps a little. I highly recommend Maynard Solomon's Beethoven biography if you're interested in his life and influences.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-01-27 19:47
I always liked the quote that I once heard (although very broad - it does convey the point).
"The Romantic movement began with the first chord of Beethoven's First Symphony"
Translation: starting the 1st Symphony with the now famous dominant seventh chord on the subdominant (F major) which seemingly takes the listener immediately into the "wrong" key.
Rebellious?
Visionary?
A troubled genius?
All of the above ..GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2004-01-27 20:47
GBK - have you studied any of the Bach Choral harmonisations? (for example). Begining a work on the dominant is not entirely new.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-01-27 20:54
diz wrote:
> GBK - have you studied any of the Bach Choral harmonisations?
Yes... too many of them, in fact.
> (for example). Begining a work on the dominant is not entirely
> new.
Absolutely correct, but there is still something about the simplistic quote I cited above which still rings true.
The Romantic era brought many new innovations in all areas of composition, form and orchestration.
This was just one small foreshadowing of greater things to come...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2004-01-27 21:55
Rob -
Remember that very few Mozart symphonies (the Haffner, #39, one version of #40 and the Jupiter) have clarinet parts at all, while all the Beethoven symphonies do. That's why your excerpt books contain so much Beethoven and so little Mozart.
Mozart is about the earliest composer still in the standard repertoire, and even that is only because he was the universal musical genius. Even so, when an amateur or school orchestra chooses what to program, they're going to pick something where everybody plays, and even professional orchestras don't like to pay full rehearsal and concert fees to people who don't have parts.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: graham
Date: 2004-01-28 08:36
In my view Haydn is a more important symphonist than Mozart. Beethoven's 3rd was the greatest breakthrough because it spanned such a range of key locations that it started the ball rolling towards chromaticism and eventually atonal composing. By the end of his life Beethoven was writing music (e.g. string quartets) that could seriously be regarded as being in the modern idiom, and not even as early as romantic.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2004-01-28 10:07
Rob -
I must admit to be being a little stunned by your question. Not to put too fine a point on it, have you actually listened to the Beethoven symphonies? Or are you just practising the excerpts?
Listen to the first movement of Mozart 41 (his last symphony) and the first movement of Beethoven 1. You will notice a resemblance between their main themes, which may well be deliberate - Beethoven's homage to Mozart, perhaps.
Then listen to the first movement of Beethoven 3. That should give you a pretty clear idea of what Beethoven brought to the party. Not to speak of the first movement of the Ninth.......
Try to find a "period instrument" recording to listen to. A modern orchestra can make Beethoven sound too polite and civilised. These pieces - the first movement of the Ninth most of all - should have a cutting edge and rawness to the sound that is wholly foreign to anything Mozart wrote. Mozart was a perfectionist. Beethoven was a revolutionary, in politics as well as art, and the performance should bring that out.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2004-01-28 19:57
I agree with David Peacham, about the period instrument Beethoven, as much as I think the whole period movement have got it basically wrong (way too beautiful playing, considering musicians in Beethoven's time and earlier were no better than peasants - and vibrato (strings) - yes well they base their style on one or two contemporary texts [Quantz and Leopold Mozart] - big deal, certainly musicans at the time would probably not have owned libraries of books because they wouldn't have been able to afford them - and Quantz and L. Mozart both taught for the nobility and that is what their books were published for).
I wish a group who plays with guts, like Il Gardino Armonico (Italian) would move about a century forward and start recording Mozart and Beethoven, they play with fire and passion - and, when I heard them in Sydney not that long ago, used vibrato in a very pleasing manner).
Knowing that Il Gardino probably won't record Beethoven too soon in the future I'd recommend the (very recent) Simon Rattle (Vienna Phil) if you want a modern orchestra or Gardener (Revoluationary and Romantic Orchestra) for period.
This is my humble opinion based on many years of research into Haydn's life and assumptions made based on pulished fact (e.g. HC Robins Landon, Hogwood, and the like).
Without music, the world would be grey, very grey.
Post Edited (2004-01-28 23:00)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2004-01-28 21:20
"Why are the Beethoven symphonies so important in the repertoire? "
Tough question...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Someone who knows
Date: 2004-01-28 22:40
How is it a tough question?
These works are more responsible than any others for solidifying the standard instrumentation of what we now call a symphony orchestra.
In addition, they are inexpressibly important works compositionally.
All this without bothering to state the painfully obvious. . .that they are very great works.
The works have spoken to audiences for almost 200 years regardless of what instruments are used to play them. Even obviously inauthentic interpretations have proven to be powerful with audiences.
I fail to understand the fascination with 'period instrument' performances. The only issue that is really important is whether the performances are good or not. Some of the period recordings are good, some are misguided and distorted. Not unlike every other recording.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2004-01-28 23:04
the period instrument movement is a worry, I agree, but they've at least tried to use contemporary instruments ... as to the sound that was generated ... well, fingers and lips have not changed in thousands of years ... so we can ascertain that there would probably be no surprises ... it's just the tricky question of interpretation and performance style ... no book will ever reproduce this.
Beethoven's symphonies are as diverse as his piano sonatas and string quartets: with beautifully written early ones (almost storm und drang and delightfully classical) to his very odd late masterpieces like the 9th symphony, the so called Hammerklavier Sonata and the last string quartet or the grosse fugue ... which are very, very stricking and very bold.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jimmy
Date: 2004-01-29 19:11
correction for ralph.
his fourth was much more of a classical symphony than his first three.
also, it is much harder! (if you take them at tempo)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: larryb
Date: 2004-01-29 20:10
correction for david peacham, who wrote: "Mozart was a perfectionist. Beethoven was a revolutionary"
Beethoven was a perfectionist (see: his many sketches, re-drafts, corrections to compositions)
Mozart was a sloppy writer (as opposed to composer - see: his many shorthands, implied ornamentation, missing parts, mistakes in autographs, etc)
Both are sublime
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Blowthing
Date: 2004-01-31 20:42
This may not be the best place to post this but my family and I sorta think that Beethoven's music is serious and Mozart's music is funny. It was hard putting this into words so bear with me.
Blowthing
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-02-01 15:55
Blowthing said:
> This may not be the best place to post this
> but my family and I sorta think that Beethoven's
> music is serious and Mozart's music is funny
I never found the Mozart Requiem to be particularly jovial ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Micaela
Date: 2004-02-01 17:51
Beethoven had more of a sense of humor than most people give him credit for. Just look at things like that early horn entrance in the Erotica first movement (which I mentioned above). And the joy at the end of the seventh symphony is as ecstatic as anything in Mozart. Likewise, Mozart can be dark and foreboding, and not just in the Requiem. Though his music is happy on the surface, it often has very dark undercurrents. Look at the Symphony No. 40, some of the piano concertos, Marriage of Figaro and particularly Don Giovanni.
I think, because they are so popular, Mozart and Beethoven are often dreadfully oversimplified. Their music has so much complexity and variety that neither can be reduced into a single description without enormous misrepresentation.
(My spellchecker thought I meant something else when I typed "Eroica." Hee hee.)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Henry
Date: 2004-02-01 17:57
Yes, "Erotica" without a sense of humor easily turns sordid!
This reminds me of the time I handed the title of a lecture I had to give to my secretary so that she could put the announcement together. The real title was "The Rheology of Emulsions". When the announcement was posted on the bulletin board and e-mailed to everyone it read: "The Theology of Emotions"!
Henry
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2004-02-01 18:11
Larry -
You are right, of course. Mozart was certainly not a perfectionist in his approach to life, and Beethoven was not tolerant of people's shortcomings.
What I was trying to convey was not so much their characters as how one needs to approach the music.
Mozart's goal seems to have been to write the finest possible music within the conventions of the time. He moved music forward by doing it better, not by doing it differently. If Mozart had not existed, we would have less fine music to listen to, but it is doubtful that musical history would have been much different.
Beethoven, in contrast, showed what could be done by radically breaking the rules.
Take just one small example. So far as I'm aware, every Mozart concerto begins with an orchestral exposition. Only after the main themes have been heard does the soloist enter. In contrast, the last two Beethoven piano concertos introduce the soloist on the first page.
Why did Mozart not try that? He must have thought of the idea.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
