[bigshot]

The horn and oboe concertos are just as great as the clarinet.

But it's in opera that Mozart becomes monumental.

 

[gregorio]

Simple and appealing isn't as easy to create as complex and convoluted.

We can’t really say that. As a general rule, “complex and convoluted” is far more difficult to create than “simple and appealing”. Looking at Mozart and Haydn for example (and even Bach), the amount of music they churned out was astonishing but for Beethoven and later, the “complexity” took far longer to create. For instance, Haydn wrote over 100 symphonies, Mozart over 40 but for Romantic period composers and later, almost no one (famously) could manage more than 9 symphonies. This is not to say “simple and appealing” is easy for us mere mortals to create but with a lot of talent, it’s easier and quicker to create than “complex and convoluted”.

There's lots of room for the performer to interpret too.

That’s a general trend as we go back in time. The notation was simpler and music wasn’t fully notated, so there was more room not only to interpret the “musicality” but even the exact orchestration and notes themselves to a certain degree. By the time we get to say the impressionists, the notation had to be far more precise (allowing less interpretation) because the music was far more complex, far more based on specific notes and specific instruments to achieve specific “colours”. So the level of “interpretive” changes made in Mozart’s day and earlier could easily and unwittingly damage/destroy the main basis of the piece in later musical periods. Interestingly, the recording industry then had a significant and limiting impact on the level of interpretation too.

No one's mentioned Brahms. When I was only listening to classical I often played his Symphony number 4 and quite a bit of Sibelius, Stravinsky. Scheherazade was a favourite.

Brahms was highly derivative, somewhat of a populist composer. In fact in the industry, Brahms 1st Symphony is often jokingly referred to as Beethoven’s 10th. That’s not to say he wasn’t an extremely talented composer though or didn’t write good/great music. Sibelius’ 5th symphony was the first piece I ever performed with an orchestra (when I was 15) and remains a favourite of mine to this day. Stravinsky was an amazing composer from numerous perspectives and Scheherazade easily my favourite romantic style orchestral suite, it was also the first piece I performed under the baton of a world famous musician/conductor (Vladimir Ashkenazy).

I'll give Don Giovanni a listen.

From a music theory/history point of view, Don Giovanni is one of Mozart’s most interesting pieces. Most of his other pieces can be viewed as a culmination or epitomisation of the classical period but Don Giovanni goes a little further and can be viewed as a sort of “proto-Romantic” period composition.

For Mozart, with his ingenious music, I often found performers to be a limiting link. I commonly enjoyed Mozart performance by children much more - while imperfect technically - often much more in spirit of Mozart to me.

It’s difficult to know what “in the spirit of Mozart” means, though many have speculated over the decades/centuries. Certainly he was flamboyant compared to his contemporaries, his hand written comments in the scores of his horn concertos are more than enough proof of that. But on the other hand, the instruments of the day allowed far less “flamboyance” than modern instruments. The Piano for example had a smaller dynamic range and was far more subtle/restrained than a modern (late C19th) “concert grand” (see “Fortepiano” if you’re interested).

G

 

[bigshot]

Just for fun...

 

[71 dB]

Chamber music isn’t much like an opera!

So what? Ryokan clearly wanted a Mozart experience much shorter than 3 hours and I gave a suggestion. Not all people, not even classical music enthusiasts, are into operas. There is no need to like everything under the Sun, at least not immediately. Let people find their own favourites with their own pace. Give them time. Personally I don't find operas the most interesting thing from Mozart, but then again I am more of an opera seria than opera buffa guy. Rameau, Handel and Puccini are my favourite opera composers, but that's me and my taste. You can have a different taste. Just lets respect each others journey of music enjoyment, because that's what counts.

 

[71 dB]

We can’t really say that. As a general rule, “complex and convoluted” is far more difficult to create than “simple and appealing”. Looking at Mozart and Haydn for example (and even Bach), the amount of music they churned out was astonishing but for Beethoven and later, the “complexity” took far longer to create. For instance, Haydn wrote over 100 symphonies, Mozart over 40 but for Romantic period composers and later, almost no one (famously) could manage more than 9 symphonies. This is not to say “simple and appealing” is easy for us mere mortals to create but with a lot of talent, it’s easier and quicker to create than “complex and convoluted”.

One thing to keep in mind is symphonies in general got longer. One Mahler symphony is like four Mozart symphonies long!

Stravinsky was an amazing composer from numerous perspectives and Scheherazade easily my favourite romantic style orchestral suite, it was also the first piece I performed under the baton of a world famous musician/conductor (Vladimir Ashkenazy).

Don't you mean Rimsky-Korsakov? Nice work indeed.

Stravinsky was amazing, but not to my taste very much. Just yesterday I listened to his Pétrouchka (Orig. 1911 version, Bergen Philharmonic Orchestra/Andrew Litton) but I wasn't thrilled. I was more in the mood for Salvatore Di Vittorio's orchestral music...

 

[gregorio]

One thing to keep in mind is symphonies in general got longer. One Mahler symphony is like four Mozart symphonies long!

Although symphonies generally (though not always) got longer, they also got a lot bigger and more complex. The symphony orchestra Mozart composed for was comprised of around 30-40 orchestral musicians, a standard symphony orchestra by Mahler’s day was around 90 or so. Structurally, harmonically and rhythmically, Mahler’s symphonies are also far more complex as well as being a lot longer. Mozart could knock out a symphony in about a month, Mahler needed more like a couple of years. That’s why Mahler only wrote 9 symphonies and Mozart over 40.

Don't you mean Rimsky-Korsakov?

Yes, when I wrote “and Scheherazade” I meant Stravinsky’s works and Scheherazade (by another composer), not that Scheherazade was composed by Stravinsky.

Stravinsky was amazing, but not to my taste very much.

I’m sure you’d enjoy The Firebird but his later works are more eclectic and need more understanding/familiarisation. I hated the Rite of Spring when I first heard it (when I was about 14) but it came to be one of my favourite pieces of all time by about a decade later, after a great deal of classical music study.

G

 

[71 dB]

I’m sure you’d enjoy The Firebird

Why are you sure of that? Have you studied my music taste in university or college?

I have stopped assuming other people like the same things I do long ago because I have seen such assumptions are silly. I let other people like what they like and in return I wish other people let me like whatever it is.

but his later works are more eclectic and need more understanding/familiarisation.

Increased understanding and familiarisation is beneficial with the music of many (all?) composers.

I hated the Rite of Spring when I first heard it (when I was about 14) but it came to be one of my favourite pieces of all time by about a decade later, after a great deal of classical music study.

G

Music is very dear to me and I rarely hate a piece of music (a really annoying overplayed popular music maybe), but unfortunately a lot of music leaves me cold. For some reasons (mental health?) I have been struggling with my connection to classical music for long and I have connected with other kind of music more easily. That's not really a problem, because there is such a cornucopia of music available for us in the 21st century. If I don't connect with the Rite of Spring, I might connect with Gottfried Heinrich Stölzel's Chamber Cantatas or Gavin Bryars' Piano Concerto or Michael Jones' New Age music for solo piano or Autechre's Confield or Herbie Hancock's Man-Chield or Jonny L's Sawtooth or Kesha's Gag Order or something else. Perhaps Goldfrapp's Felt Mountain does it for me in a certain mood? However, I don't expect other people to like this music. They probably have completely different favorites from Kiss to Pink Floyd to Shania Twain to Verdi's operas.

 

[71 dB]

Yes, when I wrote “and Scheherazade” I meant Stravinsky’s works and Scheherazade (by another composer), not that Scheherazade was composed by Stravinsky.

G

All good!

 

[gregorio]

Why are you sure of that?

I can’t be certain you’d enjoy it of course but I’m moderately sure there’s a greater probably of you enjoying it than most of his other pieces, as The Firebird is more closely related (stylistically) to Scheherazade than his other pieces and you already stated you think Scheherazade is a nice work.

Increased understanding and familiarisation is beneficial with the music of many (all?) composers.

Many pieces are enjoyable on a superficial level and require little familiarity/understanding in order to do so. Some/Many pieces can be even more enjoyable if you’re familiar with the background of the piece and have some understanding. Other pieces are difficult to enjoy at all for many/most people without familiarity and understanding. The Rite of Spring would commonly fit best in the latter category.

G

 

[bigshot]

Not all Mozart is the same, and not all has the power that I was talking about when I recommended Don Giovanni. The sonatas and quartets aren’t at all the same. Recommending works by how many minutes they are isn’t a particularly good way to do it. Perhaps the later symphonies might have some of the power of his operas, but the operas, and in particular Don Giovanni are the best place to find Mozart that’s got more going for it than just the prettiness and perfection that was being criticized here. The chamber music is actually easily criticized for that. Not a good recommendation.

I tend to try to talk about and recommend things I appreciate and know a little bit about. If you know more about it than I do, feel free to look at what I say, understand it, and offer more along those lines. But talking about stuff that isn’t to your taste and you haven’t spent much time with is a waste of everyone’s time. I don’t know why people do that. The internet seems to encourage that sort of thing I guess. But it’s better to let those who do have an interest and experience in that area talk about that. Focus on what you appreciate and know about.

To be perfectly honest, what people like or don’t like doesn’t interest me at all. I’m interested in what people who understand and appreciate have to say. Your raw tastes most likely don’t mean anything to anyone but you.

 

[gregorio]

more going for it than just the prettiness and perfection that was being criticized here.

I’m not sure if you’re referring to me? I only criticised Mozart in reference to my own personal tastes and finding his works generally somewhat predictable (compared to later period works) but I have the utmost respect and appreciation for his work.

But talking about stuff that isn’t to your taste and you haven’t spent much time with is a waste of everyone’s time. I don’t know why people do that.

Why don’t you know? Isn’t that exactly what you did for many pages regarding John Cage’s 4’33”?

To be perfectly honest, what people like or don’t like doesn’t interest me at all.

You’re entitled to not be interested in that of course. But in most cases and particularly in Mozart’s, “what people like or don’t like” is at least a serious consideration of most composers, up until the C20th at least. So if we’re going to seriously think about/discuss their work, it is typically of some interest as a motivating factor for why the piece/s is as it is.

G

 

[71 dB]

I can’t be certain you’d enjoy it of course but I’m moderately sure there’s a greater probably of you enjoying it than most of his other pieces, as The Firebird is more closely related (stylistically) to Scheherazade than his other pieces and you already stated you think Scheherazade is a nice work.

Okay, at least I can see the logic of that now. I haven't explored Stravinsky much. I know his Symphonies, Petrouchka, the Rite of Spring, Pulcinella, Dumbarton Oaks and Concerto in D Major. That's about it.

 

[71 dB]

The operas, and in particular Don Giovanni are the best place to find Mozart that’s got more going for it than just the prettiness and perfection that was being criticized here. The chamber music is actually easily criticized for that. Not a good recommendation.

Well don't recommend chamber music to anyone then if you think it is not "powerful", but let me recommend it, because I am not one of those here who criticise it for "prettiness and perfection." I have no problem with you recommending Don Giovanni, but Ryokan expressed concerns about the length of the work and I gave my suggestion of something "shorter." Maybe I should have suggested Mass in C minor instead. Would that have been "powerful" enough for you? (As if my suggestions to Ryokan needed your approval...)

I tend to try to talk about and recommend things I appreciate and know a little bit about. If you know more about it than I do, feel free to look at what I say, understand it, and offer more along those lines. But talking about stuff that isn’t to your taste and you haven’t spent much time with is a waste of everyone’s time.

What "talking" have I done with Don Giovanni? I suggested Mozart's String Quartets as an (relatively short) alternative into Mozart's music if one thinks the operas are too long. Oh, and I also mentioned I am not personally so much into Mozart's operas which is explaining my own taste and has nothing to do with me "refuting" what you say about Don Giovanni. All I am saying about Don Giovanni is I haven't been into it, okay? Just as you haven't been into all music I am into, because we don't have thousands of years to invest into everything.

I don’t know why people do that. The internet seems to encourage that sort of thing I guess. But it’s better to let those who do have an interest and experience in that area talk about that. Focus on what you appreciate and know about.

That is a good advice on paper, but it doesn't work in practice. Most of the discussion online is about who knows something and who doesn't. Does anyone here think I know something about classical music? It looks like the criteria is to be an expert on Firebird and Don Giovanni, but if you instead are into German middle baroque for example, you know nothing!

I’m interested in what people who understand and appreciate have to say. Your raw tastes most likely don’t mean anything to anyone but you.

As I said, I have stopped caring years ago about other people's tastes and what other people think about my tastes.

 

[Steve999]

I like Brahms’s four symphonies a great deal. His other works I am not quite so fond of, as the melodies in the concertos and chamber music never seem to click for me so easily. But the symphonies are full of melodic ideas and motifs and wonderful arrangement of instrumental sounds, and details that track between and link movements, and despite what sounds like complexities they still offer memorable themes and intertwined melodies and pregnant pauses and dynamics and cool uses of tympani for dramatic effect, etc., etc. I really like what he does with the woodwinds and the brass in the symphonies also, just beautiful combinations of sounds and interplay coming out of those sections. And the harmonies are very rich.

 

[bigshot]

For those who are interested, whenever possible, I'll include a link to a YouTube video I'm familiar with when I recommend something. I haven't heard every version of every classical piece, but I have heard quite a bit and I'm happy to share if you let me know what you're looking for. I promise I will try to understand the parameters of what you're looking for and won't just share non sequiturs or my personal tastes. If I don't reply, it's because I don't have experience enough in that area to comment. I try to not talk about stuff I don't know personally. HAVE FUN and ENJOY MUSIC!

By the way, if anyone is interested, here is a link to a transfer I did of a blue wax French Columbia release from 1927 of Igor Stravinsky conducting The Firebird Suite. It's not a particularly great performance, nor is it a great recording, but it's a document of Stravinsky's first recordings as a conductor. It may be the first actually, he recorded some records in London the following year, but I'm not aware of any others made in France.

https://animationresources.org/xfers/firebirdsuite1927.mp3