Music Mockney's Classical Music Thread

Class concert Waltraute. But, after listening to most of it, I have the same impression as the one I depicted above. It's all over the place, you have all the instruments, all the range of voices within the singers, and it "leads" me nowhere.

Mozart is one of the only composers whose music (not all his music of course) I have trouble delineating, structuring.

If you take this bit of Beethoven's 7th symphony, there is a clear musical path that is used and varied throughout. None of this in Mozart's work where succession of notes have, in my eyes, little in common with one another.


 
Mozart is one of the only composers whose music (not all his music of course) I have trouble delineating, structuring.

If you take this bit of Beethoven's 7th symphony, there is a clear musical path that is used and varied throughout. None of this in Mozart's work where succession of notes have, in my eyes, little in common with one another.

Isn't that Mozart's signature though? Mozart's music is whimsical. If you were strolling through a garden with Mozart, he would leave your side and run to a flower, exclaiming, "Ooh would you just look at this Azelea!" He paints the flowers individually, but with clear enough strokes that if you're off doing your own thing, you're always aware of his buzzing obsession. On the other hand, if you were walking through that same garden with Beethoven, he would command entire arrangements to shoot up from the ground to tower over you. And just when you were trying to get an up close look at one of the blossoms, he's off and doing more of the same, demanding you keep up.

Mozart is content to retread familiar ground, trying to capture every idiosyncrasy from multiple angles. Beethoven wants to cover as much ground as possible, while still describing as much as possible. The former is obsessed with the beauty in minutiae. The latter with beauty in the grandiose.

Thus if you're into more cerebral music, Mozart will irk the shit out of you. In sort of a Holy Grail 'GET ON WITH IT' way.
 
Class concert Waltraute. But, after listening to most of it, I have the same impression as the one I depicted above. It's all over the place, you have all the instruments, all the range of voices within the singers, and it "leads" me nowhere.

Mozart is one of the only composers whose music (not all his music of course) I have trouble delineating, structuring.

If you take this bit of Beethoven's 7th symphony, there is a clear musical path that is used and varied throughout. None of this in Mozart's work where succession of notes have, in my eyes, little in common with one another.

But your missing a fundamental point here Nani

Beethoven has to control every aspect of his composing and Mozart less so it's in his character

Your example is, i think, the third movement of that piece which is a theme and variations so variety is the corner stone of that form -

1/ simple tune
2/ now develope it with as many variations on the tune as you see fit

Thats a stock in trade for composers of any stature be they Mozart Beethoven or the lesser lights say Moschelles Czerny etc.

This is why Beethoven has an affinity with Haydn and less so Mozart. Haydn's music is carefully and brilliantly crafted and is a very good example of how Beethoven took many of these 'forms' and developed them in a very 'unMozart' way

This is touched upon by hungrywing who has marked the whimsical nature of some of Mozart's work - however that merely hides what lurks beneath the often simplistic melodic structure - a fine control of all the forms and an almost Chopinesue leaning to wander off the beaten track for a moment of harmonic uniqueness and magic

It is shown in the way the method of composition by both Beethoven and Mozart

Beethoven, a very methodical worker, continuously sketching and rewriting a work, that often went on getting ammended for years untill he was happy with it, he was noted as often being "knee deep" in paper :D

Mozart, a miraculous, and it really is in my opinion one of the true wonders of this earth and the pinnacle of artistic achievement as far as i know unmatched, that he could literally wake up with a finished composition in his head, write it straight to manuscript, no alterations, straight off to the printer and it was finished with no or hardly any ammedments. This was often the way he worked and it's quite staggering that so many of his pieces are practically snapshots of perfected finished music that needed no more polish!!

Everytime I think about this as a musician myself, I still find the enormity of this difficult to grasp

This 'lightness' is something that s extremely difficult to interpret as a performer, without the music coming across as 'feeble' and often 'ineffectual'

Piano is my instrument and from that point of view too many pianists play his music too lightly when actually the musid has huge poignancy and gravitas but I'll admit this is difficult to convey. Of all the composers I have played Mozart always confronted me with problems of interpretation

Beethoven in comparison is much easier as you can hear quite quickly the point he's making as it's often right in your face

Fortunately for us though we have them both and of that we ought to be grateful - both at the top of the classical 'tree' along with Bach imo
 
Fantastic posts lads, thanks for sharing your views. I can see where you're getting at, however there's an obvious contradiction in stating that Mozart's music is cerebral (hungrywing) AND whimsical at the same time (buttressed by both of you). It's obviously more instinct and intuition that are at stake rather than the brain.

What one can label as cerebral music is mostly Bach's, the third paramount musician atop of the classical tree. His only critics say his music is too cerebral. What's interesting about him in my eyes is that his music is the closest to Mozart's in terms of quick succession of various notes, while Beethoven would take the same intonation over and over, so to say. However I can very well see Bach's aim, where he's getting at, precisely because what he makes is cerebral and he reflects on which note follows best another. On the other hand, Mozart (or rather what I don't like in Mozart) puts up a succession of "unrelated" notes that perhaps make sense in his own view, but not in mine.

Evidently it doesn't take into account this fantastic requiem posted by Jopub.
 
I'm awaiting Waltraute's input on Mozart with great impatience.

 
Happy birthday Frédéric Chopin

born 200 years ago, the main influence in my life alongside José Mourinho

 
Bloody hell, if people could put their videos inside spoiler tags my pc wouldn't nearly-collapse whenever I visit this thread.

I'll go and see Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet at the ROH in a forthnight. This wicked little piece is sufficient reason to do so:

And here's Blood Axis' cute rendition of it:

I can't quite decide which one I prefer.
 
Happy birthday Frédéric Chopin

born 200 years ago, the main influence in my life alongside José Mourinho



Like I mentioned in the other thread Chopin's ability to pull the very core of tonality apart is right in the centre of this little piece, simply hidden around the most stunning of melodys. This etude is often overlooked because it has such a 'sweetness' to the main subject

One other staggering fact about this and the rest of the studies ( opus 10 and 25 ) are that were composed when he was 18 !!!

I kid you not

Completely mind blowing and I'd recommend checking out both sets of etude. They are a miracle of expression and musical economy.
 
I'll go and see Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet at the ROH in a forthnight. This wicked little piece is sufficient reason to do so:


yeah mockney had just posted it. Brilliant music


RNilsson, wiki says it's bwv 244




Jopub said:
like I mentioned in the other thread Chopin's ability to pull the very core of tonality apart is right in the centre of this little piece, simply hidden around the most stunning of melodys. This etude is often overlooked because it has such a 'sweetness' to the main subject

it's brilliant, what Chopin asks you to do with your right hand, both making the tone and the accompanying melody. Two fingers, thumb and index rigid, while the three others flutter. Astonishing piece of music indeed
 
Very interesting views on Beethoven and Mozart I'm reading here.

I quite like classical music (especially combined with metal, but I won't bore you with this here ;) ), but never even having played an instrument, I don't really know anything about the theoretical side of composing.

I quite like orchestral and choral work and my favorite composers are Mozart, Beethoven and Händel. Quite divers classical genres but all brilliant at what they did.

My favorite Mozart piece is definately the Requiem. The Kyrie (in Jopub's vid) , Lacrimosa and Dies Irae are really magnificent works. When I went to Vienna last year, I got the chance to see a performance of this Requiem in the Karlskirche, which really was a great experience.






Allegri's Miserere is also one of my favorite pieces of music, and there's a great anecdote connected to it as well:

The piece was written by Allegri for the Vatican, where it would only be performed in the Sistine Chapel, probably even only during a specific period before Easter. Copies of the composition or performances outside the Sistine Chapel were forbidden and people who did make copies could face excommunication.

When 14-year old Mozart, in 1770, went on a trip to Rome with his father, he reportedly only heard the piece once live at the Sistine Chapel and went home to write the complete piece down out of memory.
Mozart's copy has then been produced and published in England, where excommunication had little effect ;)

 
No mention of Satie yet? I think he's fantastic. Of course his Gymnopedies and Gnossienne are most famous, but this tiny piece has to be one of the most beautiful songs ever written.
 
No mention of Satie yet? I think he's fantastic. Of course his Gymnopedies and Gnossienne are most famous, but this tiny piece has to be one of the most beautiful songs ever written.
And here's another one. Bloody hell, I've been looking for this one for ages. Bergman uses it in Smultronstället, great film, lovely scene, beautiful song. Bach - Fugue in E flat Minor. (Although the video starts off with the prelude.)

Bach is easily my favourite classical composer, and I especially appreciate the solo stuff. His cello suites for sure, but ever moreso the piano pieces, any of his toccatas, and the Goldberg variations.
 
My favorite Mozart piece is definately the Requiem. The Kyrie (in Jopub's vid) , Lacrimosa and Dies Irae are really magnificent works. When I went to Vienna last year, I got the chance to see a performance of this Requiem in the Karlskirche, which really was a great experience.


here's one topic that particularly intrigues me: is it really something else attending concerts of classical music in terms of sound quality?

usually concerts of modern music are more about atmosphere than content (as musicians often don't care if they hit some wrong notes, or if the loudspeakers are off-tune) while it would seem concerts of classical music may even be better than when you listen to it on a computer

reasons for it may be that musicians are very concerned about rendering a good performance, and because there's no need for loudspeakers as well. would you say it's really something else actually going to watch pianists live?
 
here's one topic that particularly intrigues me: is it really something else attending concerts of classical music in terms of sound quality?

usually concerts of modern music are more about atmosphere than content (as musicians often don't care if they hit some wrong notes, or if the loudspeakers are off-tune) while it would seem concerts of classical music may even be better than when you listen to it on a computer

reasons for it may be that musicians are very concerned about rendering a good performance, and because there's no need for loudspeakers as well. would you say it's really something else actually going to watch pianists live?

Hm, difficult question. I don't really go to that many classical concerts to give an answer to that. And the ones I did attend were always in impressive locations (churches mainly) which make the whole experience just that much better. Hearing/seeing this piece in a church like that really is a great experience.

I think you're right about the quality of the music played. If you go to a metal concert, you don't really care that much for mistakes. You are there to have fun, rather than to hear a perfect studio-like performance. This is of course different at classical concerts, where you often have a more critical audience (at least I'd assume so) who really do go for the music itself, at least more so than rock or metal concerts for example.

I do experience quite a difference when hearing an orchestra live compared to a recorded performance. But to say one is better than the other is difficult. But the experience is definately different. For example, I pay much more attention to the instruments individually at these live concerts.
 
i see what you mean. I'll have to go to a proper classical music concert to grasp whether there's some extra audio quality that doesn't fit in the encoded music we hear on a computer.

i've been listening to this one again, wonderful

Glenn Gould (September 25, 1932 – October 4, 1982) was a Canadian pianist who became one of the best-known and most celebrated classical pianists of the twentieth century. He was particularly renowned as an interpreter of the keyboard music of Johann Sebastian Bach. His playing was distinguished by a remarkable technical proficiency and a capacity to articulate the polyphonic texture of Bach’s music.

 
I'm currently listening to Philip Glass' Metamorphosis One, single piano, it's goood.
 
At the risk of bringing film scores into this, his score for the Truman Show was also brilliant....this in particular which has more than a hint of Ludwig Van about it

 
Are you just going through threads trying to have an argument with me?

Post some classical music or feck off

In the nicest possible way :somekindofsmiley:
 
Are you just going through threads trying to have an argument with me?

Post some classical music or feck off

In the nicest possible way :somekindofsmiley:

:lol:

Seriously though, in what way is that music either brilliant or connected to Beethoven?

And some of your 'classical' music suggestions have been beyond shocking. Maksim, for christ's sake? My brother arranged parts of his album and was at the recording sessions for it. Trust me, he doesn't belong in a thread designed to celebrate the best of classical music.
 
a) I like it ...and think it bares a structural and tonal resemblance to things like Moonlight Sonata

b) at no point did I claim Maksim was anything beyond the person I chose to display Liszt's music.

c) post something or feck off you snob

In the nicest possible way :somesortofothersmiley:
 
a) I like it ...and think it bares a structural and tonal resemblance to things liie Moonlight Sonata

b) at no point did I claim Maksim was anything beyond the person I chose to display Liszt's music.

c) feck off you snob

And we're back to calling people snobs... How have I ever managed to fall into that category?
 
I'm only joking BL....But it's still subjective. You can call my taste "shocking" if you like, but at the end of the day, it's only that to you...Now why don't you post something


..or do one
 
I'm only joking BL....But it's still subjective. You can call my taste "shocking" if you like, but at the end of the day, it's only that to you...Now why don't you post something


..or do one

Has no one posted Mahler yet?

Here's the end of the Resurrection Symphony...



Edit: Embedding may not have worked so here's the link: YouTube - Mahler Symphony No.2
 
I'm only joking BL....But it's still subjective. You can call my taste "shocking" if you like, but at the end of the day, it's only that to you...Now why don't you post something


..or do one

By the way, I think the whole objective/subjective thing is a bit of a cop out.

If someone on a music forum started a thread called 'Football - enlighten me.' and the first post was a compilation of David Bentley and his flash hair playing for Tottenham, would I be a snob if I pointed out that Zidane, Pele and Ronaldo were far better examples of footballers than Bentley?

I often wanted to say that in this thread actually but could never be bothered getting involved. It's a bit unfair to post something and then label anyone who disagrees with you a 'snob'. Having good taste and a good understanding of music doesn't make someone a snob any more than having an understanding about football would make someone a 'football snob'. Unless, that is, you think that someone who says Zidane is better than Bentley (or Bramble) is a snob?
 
the most beautiful piece in the history of classical music


a parting gift
 
By the way, I think the whole objective/subjective thing is a bit of a cop out.

If someone on a music forum started a thread called 'Football - enlighten me.' and the first post was a compilation of David Bentley and his flash hair playing for Tottenham, would I be a snob if I pointed out that Zidane, Pele and Ronaldo were far better examples of footballers than Bentley?

I often wanted to say that in this thread actually but could never be bothered getting involved. It's a bit unfair to post something and then label anyone who disagrees with you a 'snob'. Having good taste and a good understanding of music doesn't make someone a snob any more than having an understanding about football would make someone a 'football snob'. Unless, that is, you think that someone who says Zidane is better than Bentley (or Bramble) is a snob?

Oh god. No, is the answer to that question. Firstly, football success works mostly on the basis of achievement, not aesthetics. David Bentley has never achieved anywhere near as much as Zidane in terms of on the field importance, influence and success. Music isn't a sport and therefore any kind of subjective comparisons are redundant. Music is almost entirely subjective as long as it's competent whereas Sport only so with people on an even level. For example Messi and Ronaldo.

To say you not liking an interpretation (which isn't even a created piece of music, it's the way said piece is played) is equatable to knowing Zidane is better than Bramble is complete madness.

The only kind of equatable comparison is two people doing the same trick, or putting in the same cross, and you liking the way one did it more than the other. So to claim your way is completely right because you know more is as far as it's possible to get from being comparable to knowing Pele is better than Patsy Palmer at doing kick ups.
 
Oh god. No, is the answer to that question. Firstly, football success works mostly on the basis of achievement, not aesthetics. David Bentley has never achieved anywhere near as much as Zidane in terms of on the field importance, influence and success. Music isn't a sport and therefore any kind of subjective comparisons are redundant. Music is almost entirely subjective as long as it's competent whereas Sport only so with people on an even level. For example Messi and Ronaldo.

To say you not liking an interpretation (which isn't even a created piece of music, it's the way said piece is played) is equatable to knowing Zidane is better than Bramble is complete madness.

The only kind of equatable comparison is two people doing the same trick, or putting in the same cross, and you liking the way one did it more than the other. So to claim your way is completely right because you know more is as far as it's possible to get from being comparable to knowing Pele is better than Patsy Palmer at doing kick ups.

I see. So Rachmaninov wasn't a better pianist than Maksim - they're just 'different'?