@mtv565 that's like saying the beatles are better than led zeppelin because the beatles came first, it is an illogical argument, music is helped by inspiration but just because you are a great artist who inspired another shouldn't mean that you are better simply that you had an interesting idea. furthermore you cannot say that mozart wouldn't have composed anything given a circumstance which did not occur, it is impossible to say
Amazing piece. Exposes Bach's paint-by-numbers fugues, filled with their long stretches of predictable 8th note runs pretending to be counterpoint, obsolete and primitive.
This interpretation is precisely to my taste. I've loved this piece since I first heard it as an adolescent over WGMS (a rather arrogant acronym for "Washington's Good Music Station," pshaw! ALL music is good) and it put me at once in touch with that puny precious little sylph I call my soul. That was before I found Bach and truly knew what a fugue could do; anyway, have been searching for decades for an interpretation to match whatever one it was I heard back in 62; voila! Merci bien!
@HerlockSholmes123 You're so biased. Not everyone needs to be good at counterpoint. It wouldn't work in his style. I'm always telling people to judge classical music in its context. You're judging all other music in the context of classical music. Each great artist is great in his own way. You need to overcome your bias towards certain styles.
@HerlockSholmes123 A great musician is simply some-one who creates great music. His music is great. His vocal melodies and chord prorgessions are great. He's not a great guitarist or singer in a technical sense but that doesn't matter. His voice is iconic and relatable. I would certainly call him a great musician; one of the very greatest, in fact. How can you say that his meldoies are not that good?
@HerlockSholmes123 You're as blind as someone who listens to rap and says classical music is shit. Virtuosity is certainly not a prerequisite. Bob Dylan is nowhere near virtuoso. If you think he's not good, just forget the whole thing.
@HerlockSholmes123 You don't need to tell me how talented Mozart was. You speak of God; Mozart is the closest thing I have. You are so wrong about music. Virtuosity means nothing without talent. Look at Michael Angelo Batio or Tiago Della Vega. They can play thousands of meaningless notes. The idea of music is to listen to it and relate to the feeling. Only deep people can understand music properly. You may dislike some rap music, as do I. That doesn't mean it's all bad.
(cont) Mozart's temperament brought an almost violently quicksilver impetuousness together with 'Apollonian' grace and balance. He died early, so we don't know how his style would have changed, but I doubt he'd have developed the panoramic structurality of Bach, or the sense of individual grandeur of Beethoven. That said, though Mozart's counterpoint is brilliant, it lacks the cohesiveness that Bach has; compare, for e.g., Bach's St Anne Fugue with Mozart's more brilliant F minor fantasie.
This is so utterly brilliant. And -- to jump into the "masters" debate (i.e. Mozart vs. Beethoven vs. Bach), I think there's no question that Mozart's technical abilities exceeded Beethoven's, and probably Bach's. He slips with such incredible, astonishing ease through diatonicism, chromatism, those little rhythmic games that seem so simple but make all the difference. But Beethoven and Bach were geniuses in their own respective rights, esp in the sense of genius being spirit ('genio').
Just an observation... Beethoven was known to have liked this piece and I have heard allegations that he used part of the fugue in some of his works (in a piano sonata i think). Does anyone else think that the second movement of Beethoven's 3rd symphony have some similarities to the Adagio of this piece?
It is amazing to think that kids my age(14) think Lil Wayne and Green Day are talented artists. But you know, that Mozart is nothing compared to Jimmy Buffet, did you know he is so good he transposed the Goldberg variations to mid C? Yep, cut all notes except for one H note(only Jimmy Buffet can see and or play H notes) to mid C and just held down the muffler for the rest of the song.
@kay198611 He didn't compare it with rap.. as of how I understod it he said it would fit as a background beat in a rap song. The way you wrote about rap/mozart god/hitler shows that you have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. There is good rap aswell as bad, it's a matter of taste.
So let me ask you this: Do you like/enjoy every classic music piece ever written? I seriously doubt you do.
@Yomonthe300 I know what he said and I think it is ridiculous. And I do know what I am talking about and don't need some random person to validate this.
@kay198611 Making a generalisation like that is biased and naïve. Some rap music is very good, and some rap music lacks expression. Some classical music lacks expression. I am as big a Mozart fan as it's possible to be. I don't think there's been a parallel of in Mozart. However, look at it like this: what Mozart did is done. People have to invent new things. Rap artists come from a different world from the world of Mozart. The ones who express themselves honestly are good.
@kay198611 I'm telling you again: you are a fucking idiot. God and Hitler don't exclude one another and are not opposites either. You are a mere cretin :/
@VinciLit 21 people thumbs up what I said. Didn't see that happening to your meaningless comments :-D Oh and how sad are you? I wrote that comment nearly a year ago and have been living an actual life ever since, unlike you. You must be a very sad loner with nothing else to do but think about my words which obviously have seriously affected you. Little tip- get a plant or something
@AEFic I would say that it is mozart's composing session.. I Feel that the man standing in the right bottom corner is mozart and that the sea itself is roaring to his composition as a part.
It's wonderfully entertaining to see you youngsters battering yourselves about the head, but to what end? Which stunning beauty is more beautiful than the next? Let each of us enjoy this exceptional music in his own way and then let it be.
@KenGold666 Counterpoint is basically the study of how to let multiple melodic lines sound simultaneously without it sounding like a cacaphonous mess. But Wikipedia probably gives a much better explanation.
beethoven was great. and as much as i would like to say that beethoven was better..he wasnt.
beethoven only wrote 9 symphonies which he poured his soul into. and i believe were all amazing.
mozart wrote a shit load. with no revisions.he didnt have to try to create a masterpiece. i believe he was far better than beethoven but simply didnt feel the need to pour his soul completely into music as beethoven did since he knew anything he wrote would be great
@MarcoGHS Perhaps, but how many of Mozart's 41 Symphonies can non-experts actually claim to have heard (or hum the melody to). Usually they know ones like #36, #25, #40 & #41. By contrast I believe a higher percentage of Beethoven's symphonies are remembered by non-experts. Note, I am *not* dissing Mozart-the man was clearly a genius, as too was Beethoven (as Mozart himself recognized!)
hmm guess i was only thinking about what researchers thought about beethoven and mozart. never really paid attention to those who dont know much about music.
so equal? haha. now i cant make up my mind. they were both amazing
@MarcoGHS I concur. As I recall, after hearing a performance by Beethoven, Mozart made the following statement about him (obviously not word for word)-"the world should sit up & listen to this man, as I believe he has something very important to say".
all who say beethoven was a better composer than mozart dont know enough mozart pieces, mozart is the master of the bass and the counterpoint and mastered it in some pieces even better than bach just listen 2 the beginning of this piece or the kyrie of c minor mass it takes u into heavens... and its a fact for me that all great composers after mozart were deeply infuenced by his genius
Mozart's fugues are often underated. His development of the subject is pure brilliance. But his fugues are sometimes obscured by those by Handel and Bach. But Mozart's fugues can match anyone's.
@Johannes999999999 Well I wasn't implying that Mozart was correct in his judgement (though Bach is, IMHO, the undisputed master of counterpoint), just that according to the writings of people who knew him, Mozart always underrated his ability to write fugues. From this example above, I'd say its a massive underrating!
What an amazing composer! That his music can touch the soul of a Pakistani some 250 years after it was written truly says something about the universality of his talent. Amazing, amazing composer!
How would Bach, Handel, and Telemann have felt about this fugue? I think they would have really liked it. They would have liked the fact that these crazy post-baroque classical kids still had good taste and good counterpoint skills.
Of course, none of them lived long enough to hear this fugue.
I was given a tape of 'Popular Mozart' I knew all the works except this one. I was gravitated to. It is not a famous or popular work of Mozart's but it should be. It is a powerful biting work written over 200 years ago yet if composed now would be considered 'Modern'! Such is the genius Mozart.
How far can you go in deforming something without breaking it. How deep can you dig into the ground or becoming insane of human stupidity without ever losing touch with salvation. Even solved this to perfection. Mysterious Genius. Masterpiece. Highly recommended for the advanced listener.
okay so xellos, the next post you make that is defending the argument: mozart is one of the top three composers of all time, better have some legitimate support. no more of these irrellevent quotes. this means talking about examples of good instrumentation, melodic content, form, development, stuff like that. you were doing pretty well for a while there talking about themes, and counterpoint, but you got a little off topic. so i'll give you a chance to get your argument straightened out.
@nco62292 You mean the fact that Beethoven modelled his own A major quartet, E flat major quintet (piano, winds), C minor piano concerto, (and the pathetique 2nd movement theme), 5th symphony in C minor, Appassionata (GGG-Eb: inspired by one of the themes from Fantasia in C minor) and MANY OTHERS after Mozart’s counterparts tells you nothing about how much contributions, progress Mozart made in the history of music.
@nco62292 Here’s an asshole who forces others to believe Mozart hated writing fugues for no reason, but dismisses all the evidence I gave by making convenient excuses that suit himself.
@AEFic it wasn't even about that!!!! i just said it was weird to hear mozart writing music that's heard from a previous era, and this guy thought i said mozart sucked!
¿Cuanto tiempo habrá que esperar para que nazca otro Mozart? Haydn dijo que en 100 años no veríamos nada igual, pero ya han pasado más de 250 años y nada...
Pierinopasquotti, Mozart's music is unsurpassed in any trials? Um, how about a trial of complexity. Yeah your musician of the gods just kinda lost right there.
@cysotbone621 I read your string of comments and wanted to say, miles of "development" (a la mahler) isn't a normative measure of musical greatness. you confuse mozart's perfecting inherited forms with copying them. bach also worked with inherited forms, and didn't specify instrumentation for some of his greatest works. true, mozart rarely wrote "strict" fugues, but his alterations could be considered "expansion of form." not complex? his 5-theme fugatto finish of symph 41 is very complex.
yeah that was the most hilarious hypocritical statement ever. what are you thinking? and you still havent given any support except, oh he is in the top 3 because he is and you cant argue with that. but please try to have this "field day" i would love to see the garbage that youre going to say
We can agree to disagree. It's all about taste and eras. I love the the baroque and classical era, Romantics don't really do it for me. Schubert, Schumann, and some Brahms and Wagner. At the end of the day it's a matter of opinion and I can give 2 f*cks about yours. I can play you Mozarts greatest and best works and it won't change your mind so what's the point? Mozart is a top 3 composer of all time, get over it. You can't even debate against Mozart but Mahler.....I smell a field day.
first off, i have been debating against mozart and so far u haven't said anything. second, i already urged u to debate against mahler...now that you've confirmed that you can after me asking you to, would you like to actually have this "field day"? if you are, i hope it's better than something like "mahler is trash." so come on...i'm waiting. tell me why mahler is a bad composer
@AkillesBeats and btw u just did it again. u just said mozart is a top 3 composer of all time with absolutely nothing to back it up with. no legitimate reasons for why his work is greater than other composers. i mean u could be talking about his opera (which is remarkable), or his great piano concertos or something, but instead u just keep giving me the impression that you don't really know anything about mozart, because you aren't arguing his strong points.
@AkillesBeats lol and i think it's odd to say you enjoy brahms and wagner, and think mahler is trash. mahler was heavily influenced by the two, and their music sounds quite similar, so i really think you haven't listened to mahler at all. your pretty much saying yea i think haydn's good, but beethoven sounds like shit.
Mahler is trash? Mahler symphonies talk about God, life, and death, so don't think that Mozart is philosophical and spiritual and Mahler is trash if you dont know the meaning behind Mahler's symphonies. If you have ever listened to the whole 2nd symphony or whole 5th symphony, I guarantee you wouldnt be saying Schubert had more skill than Mahler. Thats insanity.
I would agree with nco62292. A hundred symphonies with a lack of development aren't as great as a Mahler symphony that takes and hour and a half with a form that the early classical composers wouldn't have dreamed of. So don't think that he is showed his stupidity when you haven't experienced a great .
@cysotbone621 Mahler is trash. Brahms and Schubert have more talent and skill than Mahler. Mozart has the devine spark. There is something spiritual, something human, something philosophical and comforting about mozarts music. Mozarts music is very different and unique Haydn (Mike) and JC Bach were humbug style galant, Haydn was an innovator but Mozart took classical music to unimaginable heights.
@AkillesBeats There was nothing to do in classical music after Mozart died, only progression and growth. Beethoven too took classical music to an even higher level but Mozart had a huge imprint on Beethoven and his development, so respect the times and respect the geniuses of those times.
nothing to do in classical music after mozart died? I'm guessing to say something like that you probably haven't heard beethoven 3,6, or 9 which i might also add was not influenced by mozart. knowing that beethoven was taught by haydn, i guess i can see how someone could get mixed up by beethoven's influences, seeing as mozart copied haydn's style completely. but beethoven sparked the entire romantic era with these 3 works, which were written in the classical era.
even though it was the classical era, beethoven was so much of a better composer than mozart, that he was able to develop to an even greater extent than any composer that had lived thus far. the first movement of the eroica is longer than some of mozarts symphonies, which really demonstrates mozarts lack of development. but wait they were both in the classical era right? i thought composers couldn't develop in the classical era? no, just mozart and haydn. beethoven finally figured things out
@nco62292 As for your bullshit that “only Mozart copied others”, I recommend you listen to Beethoven’s Op.37 in C minor, and then Mozart’s K.491 in C minor – see how much “Beethoven copied” from the master he admired. Do the same for Op.18 in A major and K.464. As for your statement that “Beethoven was far better”, take some time to compare the years of life they each had. Mozart had 35, Beethoven had 58 –
@2009xellos But it all was a copy, if he wasn't copying leopold then he was copying Haydn. And I don't really care if Beethoven copied off other composers in his early lifetime as a composer, because that's what all composers do to learn the trick of the trade. It's his ability to take what he learned from copying and to turn it into something revolutionary that makes him a better composer than mozart
@nco62292 "Mozart was leopold or Haydn" - you know, YOU'RE the one who seriously needs "to read his biographies", for one thing, the best teacher he had was Martini, one of the most well accomplished contrapuntal music theorists of the time. Leopold taught his son violin playing and theory.
Haydn inspired Mozart with his string quartets whereas Mozart's symphonies of 1784 inspired Haydn. For beginners like you, I recommend listening to Haydn symphonies Nos. 76~81. Have you even listened to any?
@nco62292 I'm not even asking you to read biographies, I'm encouraging you to do google research, a PROPER google research, I mean. start with "Mozart admired Bach"
Do research on the history of serialism, polytonality and you'll find there is an atonal passage in the last movement of the G minor symphony, fantasia in f minor etc.
Sure, the one that inspired Beethoven's 5th for example is indeed a "nice melody that didn't change music whatsoever"
@2009xellos Mentioning that the Beethoven 5 motif was one of mozarts motifs supports the argument that beethoven was a more revolutionary composer. Mozart came up with a motif, not a difficult or revolutionary thing. Beethoven took that motif and created an entire movement based solely on that motif. The motif inspired him. it doesn't make sense to give mozart credit for a revolutionary movement that was written by a completely different composer just because of four notes that he used before
@nco62292 "took that motif and created an entire movement based solely on that motif." - didn't Mozart write an entire movement based on 5 themes and succeeded in "fugalizing" them in the end. You don't know how many composers before him tried to juxtapose 2,3 themes at the end of a work.
It's like saying Einstein was greater than Newton because he came after Newton...
You'll have no fucking idea what aspects of Mozart's music influenced Beethoven unless you start listening to some stuff
@2009xellos you keep giving me themes and motifs that mozart came up with that beethoven used to argue that mozart revolutionized music...if mozart wrote a motif, and beethoven turns it into something revolutionary, that doesn't make mozart revolutionary. Insparational yes, but the PIECES beethoven wrote are revolutionary, not the motives. People didn't say wow, three g's and an Eb! that's pretty daring!
@nco62292 That's sort of what I meant - "these melodies didn't change music.", why talk of melodies when there are other profound aspects in music?
even Mozart's "dissonance" quartet No.19 in c inspired Beethoven, and you'll find Beethoven told his pupil Carl Czerny, "Mozart's string quartet No.18 in A major is so harmonically advanced that it was his way of saying to the world "look what I can do when you're ready for it.""
What was that again? these melodies didn't change music?
@nco62292 music doesn't need to be fugues in order to be complex. -
what about piano concerto no.20 in D minor? Instead of starting with a primary theme like how composers of that time have done, Mozart fills it with tones of motives that combine to make "personal music"
"four notes?" What if the Mozartian pieces Beethoven modelled on were full-scaled major works? Beethoven piano concerto in C minor, string quartet in A major, quintet (piano, winds) in E flat major etc. were homage to Mozart.
@2009xellos "mozart was never specifically comissioned to write a 5-voiced fugue at the end of a symphony or in any section of an opera" haha how the fuck would you know? were you there when it was comissioned?
@2009xellos "this guy is the one who REALLY needs to know how to differentiate objectivity from subjectivity. to keep himself away from a dead-end, our poor nco62292 has to arrive at the conclusion "a kyrie fugue is a not a fugue"
How idiotic is that?"
wow, um thanks for that wonderful narration to a nonexistent audience...
@2009xellos Living a 35 year life to the fullest?! HAHAHA okay because of that statement I know you've never fuckin touched a biography on mozart. If you truly believe being a black out drunk who gambles all his money away playing billiards is living a 35 year life to the fullest, then you're retarded. oh wait you probably thought mozart just spent his whole life composing and playing music. i guess your "google research" didn't tell you that. His music is great, but the guy was nuts dude
@2009xellos "here's an asshole who forces others to believe mozart hated fugues" haha what in the hell are you talking about? I didn't force anyone to believe anything! And who cares if I say it wasn't something he enjoyed doing. Saying that isn't even an attack on his work or anything! you need to chill
@nco62292 Mozart was drunk? Threw away all his money gambling? consulting "Amadeus", aren't you?
If you read his biographies, you'll find that Mozart disliked drinking, but liked punch juice, - and had to spent a lot in getting an expensive place in an apartment & sending one of his sons to an expensive institution, his sick wife to an expensive spa. What suggests he gambled is only a popular theory.
@2009xellos consulting amadeus? when do you see mozart gamble his money away playin billiards in amadeus? and there's only one scene in it where he gets really drunk, so you can't really draw conclusions that he was an alcoholic from the movie. mozart could afford that expensive shit, he was making a really good living. it was gambling it all on billiards that put him over the edge.
@nco62292 That's my point: you "draw conclusions from the movie", which contains tones of inaccuracies. Consult historical evidence, let me tell you.
"The Gambling Debt Theory was proposed by Uwe Kraemer in Hamburg in 1976. It is true that Mozart loved billiards much and there existed some observations, by Michael O'Kelly for example, that Mozart played billiards for money sometime. However, this alone is insufficient evidence."
@nco62292 "you suffer from really shitty debating skills. If you're trying to argue Mozart's one of the 3 best..." WELL, MR. MORON, the VERY reason why I started this is because you said mozart = leopold, and remained Haydn for all his life, Haydn&Mozart didn't develop, Mozart hated fugues, including the rest of your shit - when the FACT is that, both Haydn, Mozart were decades ahead of their time and formulated the early style of Beethoven, Hummel.
@2009xellos they weren't decades ahead of their time, if they are their time. that's a retarded thing to say, they were strictly classical composers, they weren't ahead of anything because they set the stage of that era.
@nco62292 It's like someone mocking Hector Berlioz's orchestration for its lack of the sousaphone. And of course you don't know, Berlioz praised Mozart's Idomeneo for its 19th century use of colour
don't babble like an idiot: "I don't care if Berlioz praised...", the section you should give more careful attention to is the "19th century use of colour", conversely, pay attention to the later part of my other sentence - Beethoven told Czerny, Mozart's quartet K.464 "is very harmonically advanced"
@2009xellos the phrase harmonically advanced refers to the use of harmony so chords and how notes flow together. we are talking about instrumentation. instrumentation is how you use the instruments. instruments arent notes, they are those things that you see on the stage so like violin viola cello trumpet. do these sound familiar to you? harmony and instruments arent the same thing. if im sounding to complicated for you, try reading music theory for dummies so you know what we're talking about
@2009xellos and i think it's funny when you give quotes from composers that are better than mozart, saying mozart's good. if you used these to argue what we're actually arguing about, it would detract from your argument...
@nco62292 the absence of the trombone doesn't constitute his orchestration not being original whatsoever. The Clarinet was a relatively new instrument, it was Mozart who oversaw it's potential motivated his friend clarinetist Anton Schitedler into developing it further. Consider the quote "Proto-Romantic tendencies come to the fore in the G minor Quintet K.516, which rustle with nervous tension",
to argue against it, people like you say the same old pretentious shit
@2009xellos the argument isn't "was mozarts instrumentation good at the time" it's "is it good in general." of course it was good at the time it was a time of musical simplicity. in 4th century bc the geocentric model was considered a good theory at the time but obviously as time passed better theories came up and the same happened with music. this is the problem, you dont know what the debates about and your rambling about how he was good at the time. that's very nice xellos, but we don't care
What happened to the nco62292 who said his orchestration was "primitive"?
It was Bernstein who said the "atonal" passage in the development section of the final movt of the G minor Symphony is 20th century music. And the Charles Hazlewood said the D minor concerto was "decades ahead of his time", which is, frankly, true, as it did foreshadow Schumann.
I know you don't care, but if you're frustrated about the quotes.
@nco62292 “i can guarantee you any professor will tell you that Beethoven, Mahler etc” - You take everything professors say seriously, but shun what Beethoven, Ravel, Bernstein said of Mozart? You should have understood by now, that Beethoven didn’t just admire 4 notes, when he told Czerny of how harmonically advanced Mozart’s K.464 was, when he said of the Concerto K.491: “We shall not be able to do anything like that”.
Say "I don't care" to Bernstein's face next time he gives a lecture
Peter Davies suggested that they were Puchberg, Lorenzo da Ponte, Anton Stadler, Emanuel Schikaneder and Giacomo Casanova.
But there were in fact no clear evidences that all of them were gamblers. Of course, there was no testimony of an eyewitness that Mozart had played gambling with them. Reading all Mozart's letters to Puchberg carefully, we can not find any signs in his letters that the borrowings were caused by his gambling."
@nco62292 "with help of a noble lady who was Mozart's piano pupil, she was given an audience by the Emperor and was granted later to get 266 florins of widow's pension.
As Constanze stated, the rumor about Mozart's debts were spread widely among the court people. Therefore, if the reason for his debts was on account of his gambling and as a result he became poor, there may not have been a lady who suggested Constanze to apply widow's pension, nor the Emperor granted to provide it to her."
@nco62292 Mr. "I've read every mozart biography"? I never said I read every one of them. You don't need to read them all in order to know Mozart. Why don't you start with the BBC Mozart documentary - it's available on youtube.
Mozart's instrumentation lacks in originality? Try
"Adagio and Rondo for Glass Harmonica, Flute, Oboe, Viola & Cello in C minor, K. 617"
What would you say regarding Paganini, Chopin's instrumentation. Don't get me wrong, I admire them. Btw Chopin fervently admired Mozart
@nco62292 I see, in addition to strings, using clarinets, flutes, oboes, trombones, trumpets, horns, timpani, bassoons etc is "pretty basic", in the piano concerto I mentioned previously, he wrote in 24 staves. That's "basic" orchestration, isn't it? Unless instruments like sousaphone, contrabassoon were added...
Com'on, you're trying your best to keep up with your argument, but apparently, it's a lost cause.
@2009xellos dude its not about what instruments you use, its about how you use them. Mozart's use of the orchestra was restricted to certain sections which is quite primitive and lacks originality. And Im pretty sure he didn't use trombones until his last two works.
@cysotbone621 Take a good look at the score of the concerto I mentioned, the one in D minor, which is like his 200th last work and you'll see a part for "trombe in D".
"It's not about what instruments you use, its about how you use them." EXACTLY! C. M. Girdlestone “rightly emphasizes the fact that the “emancipation of the orchestra”, often attributed to Beethoven in his concerto-writing, was completely accomplished by Mozart.”
winds, strings, piano each having a unique voice is a good example
@2009xellos Hey remember that one time when I said you were losing your credibility with saying "Leonardo Bernstein"? Guess what, you did it again. "You'll see a part for trombe in D." Well, you're right, only THAT's TRUMPETS IN D YOU MORON.
@cysotbone621 the number of inaccurate, biased, one-dimensional things you've said is quite apalling. Ok, trumpets in D. So? Aren't there Oboes, Flutes, Clarinets, Horns, Bassons, Violins, Violas, Cellos, Basses, Timpani...
WOW, Mr. I-know-all-instrument-names-in-italian. For the FIRST TIME, you actually have something valuable to say
"it's not a theory that he gambled, it's a known fact that he threw it away on billiards" it's a theory YOU MORON!
@nco62292 to a GREATER extent than your wishful claim, "considering the fact that Mozart regularly played well-tempered clavier, studied many works of Handel, Bach at Von Swieten's library, incorporated much fugal writing into his works - the hypothesis that he HATED fugal writing has no fundamental basis whatsoever, and one has to conclude the person who proposed this hypothesis is mentally incapable of logical reasoning
@cysotbone621 Of course Leonardo Bernstein's quotes don't "prove" anything. What I was suggesting was- compared to his profound analysis of Mozart, (lecture on symphony no.40, where he described the ingenious use of chromatism etc) you can only come up with superficial, one-dimensional, subjective arguments that get you nowhere. Mozart = Leopold? How idiotic is that, now, you pride yourself on knowing some instrument names in Italian.
You're pretty egotistic for an ordinary musician.
@2009xellos "There are numerous composers who at the end of a work manage to juxtapose 2, 3, or even 4 voices, so as to create the climax of a finale. What is unique in the history of music is the drawing together of 5 themes as it is done at the end of the Jupiter symphony. Supreme polyphonic art is hidden in classical sound."
This is the 99th time I'm talking about the use of dissonance, counterpoint in works like Dissonance Quartet, Quintet K.516, quintet in A major.
@2009xellos "this is the 99th time i'm talking about the use of dissonance, counterpoint" so then even you realize how much you keep saying the same thing over and over again. this is the 99th time i'll tell you that mozart wasn't the only composer to use dissonance and counterpoint! this doesn't make him the best composer because he can use dissonance and counterpoint, and saying it 99 times won't make him the best composer!
@nco62292 the fact is that you don't even remember the thesis of your argument, "Haydn, Mozart didn't develop - Beethoven finally figured things out" "Mozart =Leopold, then Haydn", "Mozart did nothing to the history of music"
Suffering from memory loss are you??
"Mozart wasn't the only composer who used dissonance and counterpoint!", So, you finally admit Mozart was a composer who used dissonance, counterpoint to enhance his music, like Beethoven, Haydn. Finally, this fuckass learns something...
@nco62292 "saying it 99 times won't make him the best composer!"
If I wanted to hear from your mouth he's the best, I wouldn't have started this in the first place. It's not a trivial, subjective, simple question of, for example, "who's the best? Elgar is!"
what motivated me to start talking in the first place - go back to the previous comments, take some time to think about that.
@2009xellos alright xellos, because it's obvious to anyone that can see this debate that your entire argument is based primarily on quotes, and insulting people i'm not going to argue with you. you don't know how to discuss music intellegently and that's frustrating, and you fail to stay on the discussion topic which is also frustrating.
@2009xellos I will end with this though. go listen to the ressurection symphony. it will change your definition of musical genius. once you've heard the greatest work yet written, you will understand why it's frustrating when a person like mozart is ranked so high as a composer and a musician. and why it's annoying to see people that listen to a limited variety of classical music paste random quotes to support an argument that's not being discussed.
@nco62292 No, you've said these: "Mozart did nothing to music, Mozart and Haydn didn't develop", among many other shit.
Compelled to delete some of your old comments, are you?
Considering how inconsistent your argument is, your refusal to address evidence that doesn't necessarily support your view, tendency to generate wishful nonsense (ie. Mozart hated fugues), etc.
I appalled by how lousy you are at making balanced argument.
@nco62292 "it's annoying to see people that listen to a limited variety of classical music paste random quotes" - bet you've never listened to Agazzari. Chaminade? Ever heard of her Valse Caprice Op.33?
as for the "random quotes", I'm astounded by how inconsistent you can get, saying "I can guarantee every professor will say Mozart...", at one time, and saying "I don't care what Beethoven, Ravel said of Mozart". Really, it's quite amusing. This is what favoritism & prejudice does to people,
@2009xellos and believe it or not, but cysotbone is right...it is spelled leonard bernstein, not leonardo. i don't know what wikipedia article you read that from, but it's definately not right...
@nco62292 Oh, the resurrection symphony - as if I haven't listened to it? Bet you've never heard of Gilse.
No, forget all that lesser-known stuff - START with Haydn, you'll know the basics of the history of music development
A critic named David C F Wright once unfairly criticized Chopin to have written "too many pieces for the salon" and called him a limited composer - when Chopin's achievements in piano literature is tremondous - yes, there's more than meets the eye.
@nco62292 I’ve mentioned a thousand times – and look at yourself. Whining like a retard and refusing to understand anything. Just like the fine works you’ve mentioned, the "multi-subject finale had no parallels in history", and to think that the “atonal passage” of the final movement of k550 was conceived by an 18th century composer, you’re nothing but a retard who claims Newton contributed nothing to the field of physics because Planck’s ideas were more modern.
@nco62292 The fact is that you’re the gayest person I’ve seen on youtube. Forget the immature act of trolling with multiple accounts. No matter how hard you scream and yell, what the topic of this discussion should be, I STARTED IT, CHALLENGING your statement that “Haydn, Mozart didn’t develop, Mozart did nothing to music, and hated fugues”. You’ve just proved how inconsistent, troll-oriented, needlessly impulsive your arguments are. Btw, there are other stupid trolls who trash Schubert, Liszt
No point comparing Mozart to Bach.. cos without Bach's fugues to learn from, this Mozart fugue in C minor would NOT exist at all!
mtv565 2 months ago
@mtv565 that's like saying the beatles are better than led zeppelin because the beatles came first, it is an illogical argument, music is helped by inspiration but just because you are a great artist who inspired another shouldn't mean that you are better simply that you had an interesting idea. furthermore you cannot say that mozart wouldn't have composed anything given a circumstance which did not occur, it is impossible to say
MadTomOfBedlam 1 week ago in playlist dramatic classical music
@MadTomOfBedlam Everything in music leads to Bach. Every composer learns from Bach. Enough said.
mtv565 6 days ago
It seems a mix of Mozart and Vivaldi, i really enjoyed it!
IloveAmadeusMozart 3 months ago 2
Amazing piece. Exposes Bach's paint-by-numbers fugues, filled with their long stretches of predictable 8th note runs pretending to be counterpoint, obsolete and primitive.
ihamoitc2005 3 months ago in playlist MOZART
This interpretation is precisely to my taste. I've loved this piece since I first heard it as an adolescent over WGMS (a rather arrogant acronym for "Washington's Good Music Station," pshaw! ALL music is good) and it put me at once in touch with that puny precious little sylph I call my soul. That was before I found Bach and truly knew what a fugue could do; anyway, have been searching for decades for an interpretation to match whatever one it was I heard back in 62; voila! Merci bien!
wsmith49 5 months ago
@HerlockSholmes123 You're so biased. Not everyone needs to be good at counterpoint. It wouldn't work in his style. I'm always telling people to judge classical music in its context. You're judging all other music in the context of classical music. Each great artist is great in his own way. You need to overcome your bias towards certain styles.
benroo89 7 months ago
@HerlockSholmes123 A great musician is simply some-one who creates great music. His music is great. His vocal melodies and chord prorgessions are great. He's not a great guitarist or singer in a technical sense but that doesn't matter. His voice is iconic and relatable. I would certainly call him a great musician; one of the very greatest, in fact. How can you say that his meldoies are not that good?
benroo89 7 months ago
@HerlockSholmes123 You're as blind as someone who listens to rap and says classical music is shit. Virtuosity is certainly not a prerequisite. Bob Dylan is nowhere near virtuoso. If you think he's not good, just forget the whole thing.
benroo89 7 months ago
@HerlockSholmes123 You don't need to tell me how talented Mozart was. You speak of God; Mozart is the closest thing I have. You are so wrong about music. Virtuosity means nothing without talent. Look at Michael Angelo Batio or Tiago Della Vega. They can play thousands of meaningless notes. The idea of music is to listen to it and relate to the feeling. Only deep people can understand music properly. You may dislike some rap music, as do I. That doesn't mean it's all bad.
benroo89 7 months ago
(cont) Mozart's temperament brought an almost violently quicksilver impetuousness together with 'Apollonian' grace and balance. He died early, so we don't know how his style would have changed, but I doubt he'd have developed the panoramic structurality of Bach, or the sense of individual grandeur of Beethoven. That said, though Mozart's counterpoint is brilliant, it lacks the cohesiveness that Bach has; compare, for e.g., Bach's St Anne Fugue with Mozart's more brilliant F minor fantasie.
diuscorvus 8 months ago
This is so utterly brilliant. And -- to jump into the "masters" debate (i.e. Mozart vs. Beethoven vs. Bach), I think there's no question that Mozart's technical abilities exceeded Beethoven's, and probably Bach's. He slips with such incredible, astonishing ease through diatonicism, chromatism, those little rhythmic games that seem so simple but make all the difference. But Beethoven and Bach were geniuses in their own respective rights, esp in the sense of genius being spirit ('genio').
diuscorvus 8 months ago
Just an observation... Beethoven was known to have liked this piece and I have heard allegations that he used part of the fugue in some of his works (in a piano sonata i think). Does anyone else think that the second movement of Beethoven's 3rd symphony have some similarities to the Adagio of this piece?
toogoodbw 9 months ago
I think this is a very good interpretation of this fugue, the adagio, not so much. But that's all my opinion.
XxfireblastxX 9 months ago
waw
deksoria 10 months ago
It is amazing to think that kids my age(14) think Lil Wayne and Green Day are talented artists. But you know, that Mozart is nothing compared to Jimmy Buffet, did you know he is so good he transposed the Goldberg variations to mid C? Yep, cut all notes except for one H note(only Jimmy Buffet can see and or play H notes) to mid C and just held down the muffler for the rest of the song.
TheSaltywalrus 11 months ago
A musical tornado
thethikboy 1 year ago
This must be one of Mozart's most dark and dread-filled compositions. There's hardly a moment of let-up!
AndyDougs 1 year ago
this would be great in rap.
answers247 1 year ago
@answers247 comparing Mozart to rap is like comparing God to Hitler! Shame on you!
kay198611 1 year ago 32
@kay198611 He didn't compare it with rap.. as of how I understod it he said it would fit as a background beat in a rap song. The way you wrote about rap/mozart god/hitler shows that you have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. There is good rap aswell as bad, it's a matter of taste.
So let me ask you this: Do you like/enjoy every classic music piece ever written? I seriously doubt you do.
You shouldn't generalise too much.
Yomonthe300 1 year ago
@Yomonthe300 I know what he said and I think it is ridiculous. And I do know what I am talking about and don't need some random person to validate this.
kay198611 1 year ago
@Yomonthe300 Finally somebody reasonable.
AEFic 11 months ago
@kay198611
Hitler was closer to God than most of us, dork.
VinciLit 1 year ago
@VinciLit dork LOL who says that :-D
kay198611 1 year ago
@kay198611
I do :/
VinciLit 1 year ago
@kay198611 wtf? No...
AEFic 11 months ago
@kay198611 Making a generalisation like that is biased and naïve. Some rap music is very good, and some rap music lacks expression. Some classical music lacks expression. I am as big a Mozart fan as it's possible to be. I don't think there's been a parallel of in Mozart. However, look at it like this: what Mozart did is done. People have to invent new things. Rap artists come from a different world from the world of Mozart. The ones who express themselves honestly are good.
benroo89 7 months ago
@kay198611 I'm telling you again: you are a fucking idiot. God and Hitler don't exclude one another and are not opposites either. You are a mere cretin :/
VinciLit 5 months ago
@VinciLit 21 people thumbs up what I said. Didn't see that happening to your meaningless comments :-D Oh and how sad are you? I wrote that comment nearly a year ago and have been living an actual life ever since, unlike you. You must be a very sad loner with nothing else to do but think about my words which obviously have seriously affected you. Little tip- get a plant or something
kay198611 5 months ago
@kay198611 you're right, God was never real
odaxelagniaproject 4 months ago
Have this sound changed or this was always like this?
karla1ou 1 year ago
What is this painting? I must know.
AEFic 1 year ago 19
@AEFic Joseph William Mallord TURNER (1775-1851)
Snowstorm: Hannibal and His Army Crossing the Alps
1812
Oil on canvas
14.6 x 2.39 m.
London: Tate Gallery
skellez83 1 year ago
@AEFic I would say that it is mozart's composing session.. I Feel that the man standing in the right bottom corner is mozart and that the sea itself is roaring to his composition as a part.
MrIlayarajafan 11 months ago
@MrIlayarajafan I would say that that is perhaps possible, sir.
AEFic 11 months ago
@AEFic I'd also like to know the name of the painting/artist. Scared the shit outta me! It's phenomenal.
Moosingit 11 months ago
@AEFic
This is William Turner's. "Snow Storm: Hannibal and His Army Crossing the Alps"
Shikibu63 10 months ago
@AEFic
This is William Turner's "Snow Storm: Hannibal and His Army Crossing the Alps".
Shikibu63 10 months ago 2
@AEFic
it must be something by caspard friedrich david. they're all over the place :P
VinciLit 5 months ago
I'm not sure, but it looks like it at least refers to "The Savage State" in Cole's "The Course of Empire" series.
somervillead 4 months ago
@AEFic Maybe Gustave Courbet...
MrBipolart 1 month ago
@AEFic William Turner : Snow Storm, Hannibal and his Army Crossing the Alps
vortexaaa 1 month ago
@AEFic One of Turner's.
mediatapwater 1 week ago in playlist YouTube-mix med Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
@AEFic I think it's by Friederich...or Turner perhaps. Check some of their work )))
skellez83 3 days ago
It's wonderfully entertaining to see you youngsters battering yourselves about the head, but to what end? Which stunning beauty is more beautiful than the next? Let each of us enjoy this exceptional music in his own way and then let it be.
leavesyoubreathless 1 year ago
what does counterpoint mean?
KenGold666 1 year ago
@KenGold666 Counterpoint is basically the study of how to let multiple melodic lines sound simultaneously without it sounding like a cacaphonous mess. But Wikipedia probably gives a much better explanation.
henripche 1 year ago
haydn inspired mozart, later vice versa.
beethoven was great. and as much as i would like to say that beethoven was better..he wasnt.
beethoven only wrote 9 symphonies which he poured his soul into. and i believe were all amazing.
mozart wrote a shit load. with no revisions.he didnt have to try to create a masterpiece. i believe he was far better than beethoven but simply didnt feel the need to pour his soul completely into music as beethoven did since he knew anything he wrote would be great
MarcoGHS 1 year ago
@MarcoGHS Perhaps, but how many of Mozart's 41 Symphonies can non-experts actually claim to have heard (or hum the melody to). Usually they know ones like #36, #25, #40 & #41. By contrast I believe a higher percentage of Beethoven's symphonies are remembered by non-experts. Note, I am *not* dissing Mozart-the man was clearly a genius, as too was Beethoven (as Mozart himself recognized!)
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091
hmm guess i was only thinking about what researchers thought about beethoven and mozart. never really paid attention to those who dont know much about music.
so equal? haha. now i cant make up my mind. they were both amazing
MarcoGHS 1 year ago
@MarcoGHS I concur. As I recall, after hearing a performance by Beethoven, Mozart made the following statement about him (obviously not word for word)-"the world should sit up & listen to this man, as I believe he has something very important to say".
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091
for all who want a mozart fugue which is even better than this one check :
/watch?v=C5M9KsJ3qRM&nofeather=True
with the great doublefugue at the end makes your brain totally sick
especially the last minute of this piece leaves you speechless
i always thought bach was the absolute nuts on the organ, since i took my time for mozarts organ works which are damn underrated, like this1 too:
/watch?v=UkkwMonNsbQ&nofeather=True
Dirkovic80 1 year ago
@Dirkovic80 , who are you to say what's 'better'....
Hush.
luigiperso 1 year ago
@MrHicks091
all who say beethoven was a better composer than mozart dont know enough mozart pieces, mozart is the master of the bass and the counterpoint and mastered it in some pieces even better than bach just listen 2 the beginning of this piece or the kyrie of c minor mass it takes u into heavens... and its a fact for me that all great composers after mozart were deeply infuenced by his genius
you only have to listen closely
Dirkovic80 1 year ago 7
@Dirkovic80 , all who say who's better and who's worse, are just saddos.
luigiperso 1 year ago
@luigiperso
i never said who is better or not ... you should learn 2 read
i said, all who think beethoven was better dont know very much of mozart master pieces
but i should ask you , "who are you" to post such messed up troll comments ?
Dirkovic80 1 year ago
Mozart's fugues are often underated. His development of the subject is pure brilliance. But his fugues are sometimes obscured by those by Handel and Bach. But Mozart's fugues can match anyone's.
Johannes999999999 1 year ago
@Johannes999999999 I was of the understanding that Mozart himself compared his fugues-unfavourably-to those of Bach!
MrHicks091 1 year ago
@MrHicks091 No one can judge their own work accurately, whether they overrate it or underate it.
Johannes999999999 1 year ago
@Johannes999999999 Well I wasn't implying that Mozart was correct in his judgement (though Bach is, IMHO, the undisputed master of counterpoint), just that according to the writings of people who knew him, Mozart always underrated his ability to write fugues. From this example above, I'd say its a massive underrating!
MrHicks091 1 year ago
What an amazing composer! That his music can touch the soul of a Pakistani some 250 years after it was written truly says something about the universality of his talent. Amazing, amazing composer!
saadsultan4444 1 year ago
How would Bach, Handel, and Telemann have felt about this fugue? I think they would have really liked it. They would have liked the fact that these crazy post-baroque classical kids still had good taste and good counterpoint skills.
Of course, none of them lived long enough to hear this fugue.
b0ttomzone 1 year ago
I was given a tape of 'Popular Mozart' I knew all the works except this one. I was gravitated to. It is not a famous or popular work of Mozart's but it should be. It is a powerful biting work written over 200 years ago yet if composed now would be considered 'Modern'! Such is the genius Mozart.
napsuta 1 year ago
How far can you go in deforming something without breaking it. How deep can you dig into the ground or becoming insane of human stupidity without ever losing touch with salvation. Even solved this to perfection. Mysterious Genius. Masterpiece. Highly recommended for the advanced listener.
RichardPryor3108 1 year ago 2
Please, for the love of Mozart, end this stupid fucking argument right now. Seriously. Just. STOP.
TristramChrysostomus 1 year ago
This is just as bad as the comments on rap videos. I'm disappointed in you. Way to go about disproving the Mozart effect, eh?
VictoryOrganized 1 year ago
Aaahhh this rawness
It exceeds the very beauty of melancholy!
KarlAmade 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@2009xellos Don't feed the trolls...
Graoutine 1 year ago
okay so xellos, the next post you make that is defending the argument: mozart is one of the top three composers of all time, better have some legitimate support. no more of these irrellevent quotes. this means talking about examples of good instrumentation, melodic content, form, development, stuff like that. you were doing pretty well for a while there talking about themes, and counterpoint, but you got a little off topic. so i'll give you a chance to get your argument straightened out.
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 You mean the fact that Beethoven modelled his own A major quartet, E flat major quintet (piano, winds), C minor piano concerto, (and the pathetique 2nd movement theme), 5th symphony in C minor, Appassionata (GGG-Eb: inspired by one of the themes from Fantasia in C minor) and MANY OTHERS after Mozart’s counterparts tells you nothing about how much contributions, progress Mozart made in the history of music.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 Here’s an asshole who forces others to believe Mozart hated writing fugues for no reason, but dismisses all the evidence I gave by making convenient excuses that suit himself.
2009xellos 1 year ago
I would like to hear this piece like in former times on radio played from the Academy of St. Martin-in-the-fields! -----
What does this picture mean?
Tornadora 1 year ago
Mahler is Mahler, Mozart is Mozart and there's room for both. Let's grow up shall we?
mtend06 1 year ago
@mtend06 mahler is mahler, mozart is haydn.
nco62292 1 year ago
Why do people on the comments section always start dumb arguments over whose music is "better"? Is anyone else tired of this?
AEFic 1 year ago 7
@AEFic Amen brother!
mtend06 1 year ago
@AEFic it wasn't even about that!!!! i just said it was weird to hear mozart writing music that's heard from a previous era, and this guy thought i said mozart sucked!
nco62292 1 year ago
One dislike?... must be an error... youtube is full of errors such as this one.
Averilli1 1 year ago
Excellent choice of artwork.
StoryNClark 1 year ago
¿Cuanto tiempo habrá que esperar para que nazca otro Mozart? Haydn dijo que en 100 años no veríamos nada igual, pero ya han pasado más de 250 años y nada...
Liebanus 1 year ago
when the music comes first
reqon444 1 year ago
hmm, this one does not seem to end with a picardy third...
b0ttomzone 1 year ago
Pierinopasquotti, Mozart's music is unsurpassed in any trials? Um, how about a trial of complexity. Yeah your musician of the gods just kinda lost right there.
cysotbone621 1 year ago
@cysotbone621 I read your string of comments and wanted to say, miles of "development" (a la mahler) isn't a normative measure of musical greatness. you confuse mozart's perfecting inherited forms with copying them. bach also worked with inherited forms, and didn't specify instrumentation for some of his greatest works. true, mozart rarely wrote "strict" fugues, but his alterations could be considered "expansion of form." not complex? his 5-theme fugatto finish of symph 41 is very complex.
diuscorvus 1 year ago
Mozart , non un musicista ma la Divinità della musica. Grazie Mozart per tutto quello che dai all'umanità
Pierinopasquotti 1 year ago
@Pierinopasquotti Anche a me. Mahler, di controllo. Beethoven, di controllo. Brahms, di controllo.
cysotbone621 1 year ago
haha google translate just failed. whatever
cysotbone621 1 year ago
Mozart insuperabile in qualsiasi genere si cimenti. Non musicista ma Divinità della musica. Grazie Mozart per tutto quello che dai al genere umano.
Pierinopasquotti 1 year ago
@Pierinopasquotti Potrei elencare parecchi compositori che erano migliori di mozart.
nco62292 1 year ago
Oh i see... this is the video where the trolls come to play...
NihilTico 1 year ago
rock on, mozart
goldencricket 1 year ago 2
yeah that was the most hilarious hypocritical statement ever. what are you thinking? and you still havent given any support except, oh he is in the top 3 because he is and you cant argue with that. but please try to have this "field day" i would love to see the garbage that youre going to say
cysotbone621 1 year ago
We can agree to disagree. It's all about taste and eras. I love the the baroque and classical era, Romantics don't really do it for me. Schubert, Schumann, and some Brahms and Wagner. At the end of the day it's a matter of opinion and I can give 2 f*cks about yours. I can play you Mozarts greatest and best works and it won't change your mind so what's the point? Mozart is a top 3 composer of all time, get over it. You can't even debate against Mozart but Mahler.....I smell a field day.
AkillesBeats 1 year ago
first off, i have been debating against mozart and so far u haven't said anything. second, i already urged u to debate against mahler...now that you've confirmed that you can after me asking you to, would you like to actually have this "field day"? if you are, i hope it's better than something like "mahler is trash." so come on...i'm waiting. tell me why mahler is a bad composer
nco62292 1 year ago
@AkillesBeats and btw u just did it again. u just said mozart is a top 3 composer of all time with absolutely nothing to back it up with. no legitimate reasons for why his work is greater than other composers. i mean u could be talking about his opera (which is remarkable), or his great piano concertos or something, but instead u just keep giving me the impression that you don't really know anything about mozart, because you aren't arguing his strong points.
nco62292 1 year ago
@AkillesBeats lol and i think it's odd to say you enjoy brahms and wagner, and think mahler is trash. mahler was heavily influenced by the two, and their music sounds quite similar, so i really think you haven't listened to mahler at all. your pretty much saying yea i think haydn's good, but beethoven sounds like shit.
nco62292 1 year ago
Mahler is trash? Mahler symphonies talk about God, life, and death, so don't think that Mozart is philosophical and spiritual and Mahler is trash if you dont know the meaning behind Mahler's symphonies. If you have ever listened to the whole 2nd symphony or whole 5th symphony, I guarantee you wouldnt be saying Schubert had more skill than Mahler. Thats insanity.
cysotbone621 1 year ago
I would agree with nco62292. A hundred symphonies with a lack of development aren't as great as a Mahler symphony that takes and hour and a half with a form that the early classical composers wouldn't have dreamed of. So don't think that he is showed his stupidity when you haven't experienced a great .
cysotbone621 1 year ago
Wow AkillesBeats I bet you have never heard a Mahler symphony before, otherwise you wouldn't have put Mozart in the top three composers of all time.
cysotbone621 1 year ago
@cysotbone621 Mahler is trash. Brahms and Schubert have more talent and skill than Mahler. Mozart has the devine spark. There is something spiritual, something human, something philosophical and comforting about mozarts music. Mozarts music is very different and unique Haydn (Mike) and JC Bach were humbug style galant, Haydn was an innovator but Mozart took classical music to unimaginable heights.
AkillesBeats 1 year ago
@AkillesBeats There was nothing to do in classical music after Mozart died, only progression and growth. Beethoven too took classical music to an even higher level but Mozart had a huge imprint on Beethoven and his development, so respect the times and respect the geniuses of those times.
AkillesBeats 1 year ago
nothing to do in classical music after mozart died? I'm guessing to say something like that you probably haven't heard beethoven 3,6, or 9 which i might also add was not influenced by mozart. knowing that beethoven was taught by haydn, i guess i can see how someone could get mixed up by beethoven's influences, seeing as mozart copied haydn's style completely. but beethoven sparked the entire romantic era with these 3 works, which were written in the classical era.
nco62292 1 year ago
even though it was the classical era, beethoven was so much of a better composer than mozart, that he was able to develop to an even greater extent than any composer that had lived thus far. the first movement of the eroica is longer than some of mozarts symphonies, which really demonstrates mozarts lack of development. but wait they were both in the classical era right? i thought composers couldn't develop in the classical era? no, just mozart and haydn. beethoven finally figured things out
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 As for your bullshit that “only Mozart copied others”, I recommend you listen to Beethoven’s Op.37 in C minor, and then Mozart’s K.491 in C minor – see how much “Beethoven copied” from the master he admired. Do the same for Op.18 in A major and K.464. As for your statement that “Beethoven was far better”, take some time to compare the years of life they each had. Mozart had 35, Beethoven had 58 –
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos But it all was a copy, if he wasn't copying leopold then he was copying Haydn. And I don't really care if Beethoven copied off other composers in his early lifetime as a composer, because that's what all composers do to learn the trick of the trade. It's his ability to take what he learned from copying and to turn it into something revolutionary that makes him a better composer than mozart
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 "Mozart was leopold or Haydn" - you know, YOU'RE the one who seriously needs "to read his biographies", for one thing, the best teacher he had was Martini, one of the most well accomplished contrapuntal music theorists of the time. Leopold taught his son violin playing and theory.
Haydn inspired Mozart with his string quartets whereas Mozart's symphonies of 1784 inspired Haydn. For beginners like you, I recommend listening to Haydn symphonies Nos. 76~81. Have you even listened to any?
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 I'm not even asking you to read biographies, I'm encouraging you to do google research, a PROPER google research, I mean. start with "Mozart admired Bach"
Do research on the history of serialism, polytonality and you'll find there is an atonal passage in the last movement of the G minor symphony, fantasia in f minor etc.
Sure, the one that inspired Beethoven's 5th for example is indeed a "nice melody that didn't change music whatsoever"
is there an end to your contradictions?
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos Mentioning that the Beethoven 5 motif was one of mozarts motifs supports the argument that beethoven was a more revolutionary composer. Mozart came up with a motif, not a difficult or revolutionary thing. Beethoven took that motif and created an entire movement based solely on that motif. The motif inspired him. it doesn't make sense to give mozart credit for a revolutionary movement that was written by a completely different composer just because of four notes that he used before
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 "took that motif and created an entire movement based solely on that motif." - didn't Mozart write an entire movement based on 5 themes and succeeded in "fugalizing" them in the end. You don't know how many composers before him tried to juxtapose 2,3 themes at the end of a work.
It's like saying Einstein was greater than Newton because he came after Newton...
You'll have no fucking idea what aspects of Mozart's music influenced Beethoven unless you start listening to some stuff
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos you keep giving me themes and motifs that mozart came up with that beethoven used to argue that mozart revolutionized music...if mozart wrote a motif, and beethoven turns it into something revolutionary, that doesn't make mozart revolutionary. Insparational yes, but the PIECES beethoven wrote are revolutionary, not the motives. People didn't say wow, three g's and an Eb! that's pretty daring!
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 That's sort of what I meant - "these melodies didn't change music.", why talk of melodies when there are other profound aspects in music?
even Mozart's "dissonance" quartet No.19 in c inspired Beethoven, and you'll find Beethoven told his pupil Carl Czerny, "Mozart's string quartet No.18 in A major is so harmonically advanced that it was his way of saying to the world "look what I can do when you're ready for it.""
What was that again? these melodies didn't change music?
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 music doesn't need to be fugues in order to be complex. -
what about piano concerto no.20 in D minor? Instead of starting with a primary theme like how composers of that time have done, Mozart fills it with tones of motives that combine to make "personal music"
"four notes?" What if the Mozartian pieces Beethoven modelled on were full-scaled major works? Beethoven piano concerto in C minor, string quartet in A major, quintet (piano, winds) in E flat major etc. were homage to Mozart.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos wow "beginners like you?" quit taking cheap shots and stick to the debate
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos "it would take him a shitload of money to do something he didn't enjoy doing." I don't see how taht validates your point...
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos "mozart was never specifically comissioned to write a 5-voiced fugue at the end of a symphony or in any section of an opera" haha how the fuck would you know? were you there when it was comissioned?
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos "this guy is the one who REALLY needs to know how to differentiate objectivity from subjectivity. to keep himself away from a dead-end, our poor nco62292 has to arrive at the conclusion "a kyrie fugue is a not a fugue"
How idiotic is that?"
wow, um thanks for that wonderful narration to a nonexistent audience...
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos Living a 35 year life to the fullest?! HAHAHA okay because of that statement I know you've never fuckin touched a biography on mozart. If you truly believe being a black out drunk who gambles all his money away playing billiards is living a 35 year life to the fullest, then you're retarded. oh wait you probably thought mozart just spent his whole life composing and playing music. i guess your "google research" didn't tell you that. His music is great, but the guy was nuts dude
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos "here's an asshole who forces others to believe mozart hated fugues" haha what in the hell are you talking about? I didn't force anyone to believe anything! And who cares if I say it wasn't something he enjoyed doing. Saying that isn't even an attack on his work or anything! you need to chill
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 Mozart was drunk? Threw away all his money gambling? consulting "Amadeus", aren't you?
If you read his biographies, you'll find that Mozart disliked drinking, but liked punch juice, - and had to spent a lot in getting an expensive place in an apartment & sending one of his sons to an expensive institution, his sick wife to an expensive spa. What suggests he gambled is only a popular theory.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos consulting amadeus? when do you see mozart gamble his money away playin billiards in amadeus? and there's only one scene in it where he gets really drunk, so you can't really draw conclusions that he was an alcoholic from the movie. mozart could afford that expensive shit, he was making a really good living. it was gambling it all on billiards that put him over the edge.
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 That's my point: you "draw conclusions from the movie", which contains tones of inaccuracies. Consult historical evidence, let me tell you.
"The Gambling Debt Theory was proposed by Uwe Kraemer in Hamburg in 1976. It is true that Mozart loved billiards much and there existed some observations, by Michael O'Kelly for example, that Mozart played billiards for money sometime. However, this alone is insufficient evidence."
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 "you suffer from really shitty debating skills. If you're trying to argue Mozart's one of the 3 best..." WELL, MR. MORON, the VERY reason why I started this is because you said mozart = leopold, and remained Haydn for all his life, Haydn&Mozart didn't develop, Mozart hated fugues, including the rest of your shit - when the FACT is that, both Haydn, Mozart were decades ahead of their time and formulated the early style of Beethoven, Hummel.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos they weren't decades ahead of their time, if they are their time. that's a retarded thing to say, they were strictly classical composers, they weren't ahead of anything because they set the stage of that era.
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292
We listen to what Beethoven, Ravel, Grieg, Tchaikovsky, Leonardo Bernstein said about Mozart.
even I can tear you and your moronic analysis into shreds. If it were toilet paper, I'd use it to wipe my anus.
"there's one scene where he gets really drunk... and then, I saw, in the next scene...",
getting kicked in the ass everytime, but now, you finally get a golden opportunity to strike back, bravo, Mr.Trombone guy.
swayed by an inferiority complex, aren't you? LOL
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos um, i think you were trying to insult me but it didn't make sense...
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 It's like someone mocking Hector Berlioz's orchestration for its lack of the sousaphone. And of course you don't know, Berlioz praised Mozart's Idomeneo for its 19th century use of colour
don't babble like an idiot: "I don't care if Berlioz praised...", the section you should give more careful attention to is the "19th century use of colour", conversely, pay attention to the later part of my other sentence - Beethoven told Czerny, Mozart's quartet K.464 "is very harmonically advanced"
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos the phrase harmonically advanced refers to the use of harmony so chords and how notes flow together. we are talking about instrumentation. instrumentation is how you use the instruments. instruments arent notes, they are those things that you see on the stage so like violin viola cello trumpet. do these sound familiar to you? harmony and instruments arent the same thing. if im sounding to complicated for you, try reading music theory for dummies so you know what we're talking about
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos and i think it's funny when you give quotes from composers that are better than mozart, saying mozart's good. if you used these to argue what we're actually arguing about, it would detract from your argument...
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 the absence of the trombone doesn't constitute his orchestration not being original whatsoever. The Clarinet was a relatively new instrument, it was Mozart who oversaw it's potential motivated his friend clarinetist Anton Schitedler into developing it further. Consider the quote "Proto-Romantic tendencies come to the fore in the G minor Quintet K.516, which rustle with nervous tension",
to argue against it, people like you say the same old pretentious shit
so frighteningly amateur!
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos the argument isn't "was mozarts instrumentation good at the time" it's "is it good in general." of course it was good at the time it was a time of musical simplicity. in 4th century bc the geocentric model was considered a good theory at the time but obviously as time passed better theories came up and the same happened with music. this is the problem, you dont know what the debates about and your rambling about how he was good at the time. that's very nice xellos, but we don't care
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292
What happened to the nco62292 who said his orchestration was "primitive"?
It was Bernstein who said the "atonal" passage in the development section of the final movt of the G minor Symphony is 20th century music. And the Charles Hazlewood said the D minor concerto was "decades ahead of his time", which is, frankly, true, as it did foreshadow Schumann.
I know you don't care, but if you're frustrated about the quotes.
blame it on Beethoven and Bernstein, not me.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 “i can guarantee you any professor will tell you that Beethoven, Mahler etc” - You take everything professors say seriously, but shun what Beethoven, Ravel, Bernstein said of Mozart? You should have understood by now, that Beethoven didn’t just admire 4 notes, when he told Czerny of how harmonically advanced Mozart’s K.464 was, when he said of the Concerto K.491: “We shall not be able to do anything like that”.
Say "I don't care" to Bernstein's face next time he gives a lecture
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos and, mr. "i've read every mozart biography" it's not a theory that he gambled, it's a known fact that he threw it away on billiards
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292
"Who were the supposed gambling circle ?
Peter Davies suggested that they were Puchberg, Lorenzo da Ponte, Anton Stadler, Emanuel Schikaneder and Giacomo Casanova.
But there were in fact no clear evidences that all of them were gamblers. Of course, there was no testimony of an eyewitness that Mozart had played gambling with them. Reading all Mozart's letters to Puchberg carefully, we can not find any signs in his letters that the borrowings were caused by his gambling."
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 "with help of a noble lady who was Mozart's piano pupil, she was given an audience by the Emperor and was granted later to get 266 florins of widow's pension.
As Constanze stated, the rumor about Mozart's debts were spread widely among the court people. Therefore, if the reason for his debts was on account of his gambling and as a result he became poor, there may not have been a lady who suggested Constanze to apply widow's pension, nor the Emperor granted to provide it to her."
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 Mr. "I've read every mozart biography"? I never said I read every one of them. You don't need to read them all in order to know Mozart. Why don't you start with the BBC Mozart documentary - it's available on youtube.
Mozart's instrumentation lacks in originality? Try
"Adagio and Rondo for Glass Harmonica, Flute, Oboe, Viola & Cello in C minor, K. 617"
What would you say regarding Paganini, Chopin's instrumentation. Don't get me wrong, I admire them. Btw Chopin fervently admired Mozart
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos "top 3 composers?" yea dude, read about what the argument is before you interrupt a debate.
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos "first you should know what we're discussing about"
dude, we were talking about this months before you butt in
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 I see, in addition to strings, using clarinets, flutes, oboes, trombones, trumpets, horns, timpani, bassoons etc is "pretty basic", in the piano concerto I mentioned previously, he wrote in 24 staves. That's "basic" orchestration, isn't it? Unless instruments like sousaphone, contrabassoon were added...
Com'on, you're trying your best to keep up with your argument, but apparently, it's a lost cause.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos dude its not about what instruments you use, its about how you use them. Mozart's use of the orchestra was restricted to certain sections which is quite primitive and lacks originality. And Im pretty sure he didn't use trombones until his last two works.
cysotbone621 1 year ago
@cysotbone621 Take a good look at the score of the concerto I mentioned, the one in D minor, which is like his 200th last work and you'll see a part for "trombe in D".
"It's not about what instruments you use, its about how you use them." EXACTLY! C. M. Girdlestone “rightly emphasizes the fact that the “emancipation of the orchestra”, often attributed to Beethoven in his concerto-writing, was completely accomplished by Mozart.”
winds, strings, piano each having a unique voice is a good example
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos Hey remember that one time when I said you were losing your credibility with saying "Leonardo Bernstein"? Guess what, you did it again. "You'll see a part for trombe in D." Well, you're right, only THAT's TRUMPETS IN D YOU MORON.
cysotbone621 1 year ago
@cysotbone621 the number of inaccurate, biased, one-dimensional things you've said is quite apalling. Ok, trumpets in D. So? Aren't there Oboes, Flutes, Clarinets, Horns, Bassons, Violins, Violas, Cellos, Basses, Timpani...
WOW, Mr. I-know-all-instrument-names-in-italian. For the FIRST TIME, you actually have something valuable to say
"it's not a theory that he gambled, it's a known fact that he threw it away on billiards" it's a theory YOU MORON!
IT'S A THEORY THAT HE GAMBLED, YOU FUCKASS
2009xellos 1 year ago
@cysotbone621 of Bach's music Mozart said "Here's something where we can all learn from"
Mozart hated fugal writing? YOU MORON!
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos liking bach doesn't mean you love writing fugues dumbass...
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 to a GREATER extent than your wishful claim, "considering the fact that Mozart regularly played well-tempered clavier, studied many works of Handel, Bach at Von Swieten's library, incorporated much fugal writing into his works - the hypothesis that he HATED fugal writing has no fundamental basis whatsoever, and one has to conclude the person who proposed this hypothesis is mentally incapable of logical reasoning
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos hey moron, now youre using quotes from nco62292 that i never said, but alright awesome
cysotbone621 1 year ago
@cysotbone621 Of course Leonardo Bernstein's quotes don't "prove" anything. What I was suggesting was- compared to his profound analysis of Mozart, (lecture on symphony no.40, where he described the ingenious use of chromatism etc) you can only come up with superficial, one-dimensional, subjective arguments that get you nowhere. Mozart = Leopold? How idiotic is that, now, you pride yourself on knowing some instrument names in Italian.
You're pretty egotistic for an ordinary musician.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos "There are numerous composers who at the end of a work manage to juxtapose 2, 3, or even 4 voices, so as to create the climax of a finale. What is unique in the history of music is the drawing together of 5 themes as it is done at the end of the Jupiter symphony. Supreme polyphonic art is hidden in classical sound."
This is the 99th time I'm talking about the use of dissonance, counterpoint in works like Dissonance Quartet, Quintet K.516, quintet in A major.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos "this is the 99th time i'm talking about the use of dissonance, counterpoint" so then even you realize how much you keep saying the same thing over and over again. this is the 99th time i'll tell you that mozart wasn't the only composer to use dissonance and counterpoint! this doesn't make him the best composer because he can use dissonance and counterpoint, and saying it 99 times won't make him the best composer!
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 the fact is that you don't even remember the thesis of your argument, "Haydn, Mozart didn't develop - Beethoven finally figured things out" "Mozart =Leopold, then Haydn", "Mozart did nothing to the history of music"
Suffering from memory loss are you??
"Mozart wasn't the only composer who used dissonance and counterpoint!", So, you finally admit Mozart was a composer who used dissonance, counterpoint to enhance his music, like Beethoven, Haydn. Finally, this fuckass learns something...
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 "saying it 99 times won't make him the best composer!"
If I wanted to hear from your mouth he's the best, I wouldn't have started this in the first place. It's not a trivial, subjective, simple question of, for example, "who's the best? Elgar is!"
what motivated me to start talking in the first place - go back to the previous comments, take some time to think about that.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos alright xellos, because it's obvious to anyone that can see this debate that your entire argument is based primarily on quotes, and insulting people i'm not going to argue with you. you don't know how to discuss music intellegently and that's frustrating, and you fail to stay on the discussion topic which is also frustrating.
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos I will end with this though. go listen to the ressurection symphony. it will change your definition of musical genius. once you've heard the greatest work yet written, you will understand why it's frustrating when a person like mozart is ranked so high as a composer and a musician. and why it's annoying to see people that listen to a limited variety of classical music paste random quotes to support an argument that's not being discussed.
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 No, you've said these: "Mozart did nothing to music, Mozart and Haydn didn't develop", among many other shit.
Compelled to delete some of your old comments, are you?
Considering how inconsistent your argument is, your refusal to address evidence that doesn't necessarily support your view, tendency to generate wishful nonsense (ie. Mozart hated fugues), etc.
I appalled by how lousy you are at making balanced argument.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 "it's annoying to see people that listen to a limited variety of classical music paste random quotes" - bet you've never listened to Agazzari. Chaminade? Ever heard of her Valse Caprice Op.33?
as for the "random quotes", I'm astounded by how inconsistent you can get, saying "I can guarantee every professor will say Mozart...", at one time, and saying "I don't care what Beethoven, Ravel said of Mozart". Really, it's quite amusing. This is what favoritism & prejudice does to people,
2009xellos 1 year ago
@2009xellos whatever you say pal
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos trolling with the same account dude, cyso tbone is a different person ya jackass
nco62292 1 year ago
@2009xellos and believe it or not, but cysotbone is right...it is spelled leonard bernstein, not leonardo. i don't know what wikipedia article you read that from, but it's definately not right...
nco62292 1 year ago
@nco62292 Oh, the resurrection symphony - as if I haven't listened to it? Bet you've never heard of Gilse.
No, forget all that lesser-known stuff - START with Haydn, you'll know the basics of the history of music development
A critic named David C F Wright once unfairly criticized Chopin to have written "too many pieces for the salon" and called him a limited composer - when Chopin's achievements in piano literature is tremondous - yes, there's more than meets the eye.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 I’ve mentioned a thousand times – and look at yourself. Whining like a retard and refusing to understand anything. Just like the fine works you’ve mentioned, the "multi-subject finale had no parallels in history", and to think that the “atonal passage” of the final movement of k550 was conceived by an 18th century composer, you’re nothing but a retard who claims Newton contributed nothing to the field of physics because Planck’s ideas were more modern.
2009xellos 1 year ago
@nco62292 The fact is that you’re the gayest person I’ve seen on youtube. Forget the immature act of trolling with multiple accounts. No matter how hard you scream and yell, what the topic of this discussion should be, I STARTED IT, CHALLENGING your statement that “Haydn, Mozart didn’t develop, Mozart did nothing to music, and hated fugues”. You’ve just proved how inconsistent, troll-oriented, needlessly impulsive your arguments are. Btw, there are other stupid trolls who trash Schubert, Liszt
2009xellos 1 year ago