Your Top Violin Concertos!

[Harry Collier]

If you can't enjoy it's "inferiority" that's your problem.

Inferior to what?

Good question. I am no great fan of the Mozart violin concertos. But compared with many of those mentioned in this thread, they are major masterpieces that fully justify their continuing popularity after nearly 250 years.

[violinconcerto]

Good question. I am no great fan of the Mozart violin concertos. But compared with many of those mentioned in this thread, they are major masterpieces that fully justify their continuing popularity after nearly 250 years.

Isn't the thread title "YOUR top violin concertos"? If the title would have been "Mankind top violin concertos" we could discuss if Mozarts violin concertos are masterpieces, but in this thread I have to say: No, they aren't.

[Josquin des Prez]

Inferior to what?

Inferior to greater music, of course. And the fact you enjoy it is mighty irrelevant to everybody...

[Israfel the Black]

I don't understand why people find early Mozart weak. I find his Violin Concertos very good. I like other early Mozart too. He is ambitious to show of his skills and uses more baroque-like complexity. Later Mozart can be even annoying as he shows more crowd pleasing simplicity (especially in his operas) than ambitious structures.

I tend to agree completely. You raise a very good point as well, in regards to his operas. His operas are more crowd pleasing, yet would I say they are less ambitious or less artistic? That's a difficult question. Conversely, his early work was written when he was younger and perhaps more inexperienced, yet does that mean they are less ambitious, artistic, or even great? Too often people tend to let their perception of the composer's life skew their judgment of the music itself.

Point being? It's still inferior.

How so? I challenge you to explain to me how his 40th Symphony is superior to his Violin Concerto #3. It follows a familiar harmonic structure and basic sonata form, and its first movement is simply repetition. It has a nice finale, but its greatness is found in its good tunes and melodies, let's not kid ourselves. I am unconvinced it is far superior to his Violin Concertos.

[Josquin des Prez]

I am unconvinced it is far superior to his Violin Concertos.

What trite, this forum is getting worst by the day. Imagine telling poor old Wolfgang that after so many years of accumulated experience and personal growth he couldn't top something he wrote in his teens.

but its greatness is found in its good tunes and melodies

From the point of view of form, orchestration, structural logic and the inner dialog among all the voices (something Mozart first mastered with his 'Haydn' quartets), that symphony is head and shoulders above his violin concertos. Even if you could narrow it down to it's melodies and 'good tunes', they not only set the piece apart from the concertos even more but they also demonstrate the incredible originality and distinction of his melodic powers at this time. Haydn had barely published his 'paris' symphonies (his best yet) and there you have Mozart pushing the envelop even further seemingly without effort.

[Steve]

I tend to agree completely. You raise a very good point as well, in regards to his operas. His operas are more crowd pleasing, yet would I say they are less ambitious or less artistic? That's a difficult question. Conversely, his early work was written when he was younger and perhaps more inexperienced, yet does that mean they are less ambitious, artistic, or even great? Too often people tend to let their perception of the composer's life skew their judgment of the music itself.

How so? I challenge you to explain to me how his 40th Symphony is superior to his Violin Concerto #3. It follows a familiar harmonic structure and basic sonata form, and its first movement is simply repetition. It has a nice finale, but its greatness is found in its good tunes and melodies, let's not kid ourselves. I am unconvinced it is far superior to his Violin Concertos.

The Violin Concertos are certainly impressive works, but they feature a young Mozart, whose skills of orchestration are still in their infancy. Comparing the impressive complexity and texture of his 40th symphony to his Violin Concertos doesn't really make sense. Certainly the concerto has beautiful melodies and the general harmonic framework is the same, but it lacks the depth of his later symphonies. The Violin Concerto as a form wasn't really held in the same regard as it is now. I've never really been especially impressed with pre-Romantic violin concertos.

[Bunny]

The Violin Concertos are certainly impressive works, but they feature a young Mozart, whose skills of orchestration are still in their infancy. Comparing the impressive complexity and texture of his 40th symphony to his Violin Concertos doesn't really make sense. Certainly the concerto has beautiful melodies and the general harmonic framework is the same, but it lacks the depth of his later symphonies. The Violin Concerto as a form wasn't really held in the same regard as it is now. I've never really been especially impressed with pre-Romantic violin concertos.

How about Bach's violin concerto and the double violin concerto?  Not impressed by those either?

[Steve]

How about Bach's violin concerto and the double violin concerto?  Not impressed by those either?

There are, of course, a few notable exceptions.

[Israfel the Black]

The Violin Concertos are certainly impressive works, but they feature a young Mozart, whose skills of orchestration are still in their infancy. Comparing the impressive complexity and texture of his 40th symphony to his Violin Concertos doesn't really make sense. Certainly the concerto has beautiful melodies and the general harmonic framework is the same, but it lacks the depth of his later symphonies. The Violin Concerto as a form wasn't really held in the same regard as it is now. I've never really been especially impressed with pre-Romantic violin concertos.

Mozart's skill in orchestration matured with his late symphonies, most significantly with his 39th and 41st. The issue is that I don't view maturation of style the same as many of you may. He learned new methods of orchestration, but I disagree that he learned greater methods of orchestration (beginning with the Violin Concertos). Mozart was a master when he wrote his Violin Concertos. They reach sheer brilliance. At mastery level, it's really not so much of knowing more as it is advancing one's style through experimenting with new techniques with the language (ex. Beethoven from Classical to Romantic). The only way you can convince me his Violin Concertos are inferior to any of his late work is if you can indicate flaws, inconsistent logic, or dull melody in the music. In the same respect, I cannot be convinced Mahler's First Symphony is inferior to his Ninth simply because they have different thematic content. Structurally, the First is a masterpiece.

[Bunny]

The Violin Concertos are certainly impressive works, but they feature a young Mozart, whose skills of orchestration are still in their infancy. Comparing the impressive complexity and texture of his 40th symphony to his Violin Concertos doesn't really make sense. Certainly the concerto has beautiful melodies and the general harmonic framework is the same, but it lacks the depth of his later symphonies. The Violin Concerto as a form wasn't really held in the same regard as it is now. I've never really been especially impressed with pre-Romantic violin concertos.

There are, of course, a few notable exceptions.

If there is even one exception, then you shouldn't use an absolute such as never. 

I'm sure that if you give it some thought you will be able to come up with a few more great pre-Romantic violin concerti.

[Israfel the Black]

Not to mention Vivaldi's The Four Seasons among others. His claim was pretty odd. Concerto form as a whole was still shaping in the pre-Romantic eras (and the Symphony, and the Opera, and so on and so on) , yet the masters produced masterworks in the genre just as well as the romantics.

[Josquin des Prez]

The only way you can convince me his Violin Concertos are inferior to any of his late work is if you can indicate flaws, inconsistent logic, or dull melody in the music.

By that reasoning you could argue nobody has ever written anything greater then a Telemann overture.

[Steve]

If there is even one exception, then you shouldn't use an absolute such as never. 

I'm sure that if you give it some thought you will be able to come up with a few more great pre-Romantic violin concerti.

Correction: I don't consider the Bach concerti to be exceptions. They are beautiful pieces, but I haven't been really affected by them in any profound way. So, back to the absolute.

I have never been significantly moved by a pre-Romantic violin concerto. That's not disputable.

None deserving mention on this thread.

This thread is about our 'Top Violin Concertos'. I wouldn't nominate any pre-Romantic works for that distinction.

Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, Prokokiev, Elgar, Sibelius....

[Israfel the Black]

By that reasoning you could argue nobody has ever written anything greater then a Telemann overture.

Edit: Misread your post

Yes, you could argue that. Greatness in art cannot be measured objectively. The objective merits come in through study of music theory in structure, harmony, and the sorts. Yet, these merits are not observed based on value judgments (instead favoring terms such as 'effective' and 'ineffective' to those such as 'good' and 'bad'). As you can see, if we used the reverse reasoning, you would argue music peaked with the Romantics (or the serialists) and everything before it is merely a progression of musical greatness. This, of course, is absurd. The reason the 9th is great, and why Beethoven is a great composer, is because he was a progressive while also a master of previous forms. It's the nature of reason and critical consensus that this marks true genial greatness. Yet, this does not mean all music that he wrote that was not in some way progressive or revolutionary is inferior. There are many fans of Baroque music who are perfectly content with overtures from Telemann and cantatas from Bach, and could easily make the argument that greatness peaked with these composers. They were geniuses, mastered old forms, introduced new forms, thus, the preference of particular forms is subjective, but certainly does not deem the music superior to all else. As for the Telemann overture, it would depend on which one you are talking about in particular.

[Josquin des Prez]

Yes, you could argue that. Greatness in art cannot be measured objectively.

To think i was being sarcastic. If art cannot be measured objectively, then how is it that no Telemann overture has ever or will ever be considered as great as a Beethoven string quartet? This is what happens when you deal with absolutes, now you have to argue with the ridiculous.

[Valentino]

1) LvB
2) Mozart 5
3) Mendelssohn
4) Bruch
5) Paganini 1

Boring, huh?

[71 dB]

I tend to agree completely. You raise a very good point as well, in regards to his operas. His operas are more crowd pleasing, yet would I say they are less ambitious or less artistic? That's a difficult question. Conversely, his early work was written when he was younger and perhaps more inexperienced, yet does that mean they are less ambitious, artistic, or even great? Too often people tend to let their perception of the composer's life skew their judgment of the music itself.

It's always nice to see someone agrees with my 'free-thinker' thoughts. I hear a clear difference between young and old Mozart. I explain this difference this way:

When Mozart was young he was trying to show the world how sophisticated and complex music he can compose. That was the way to impress. That was the way his father earned money traveling with young Mozart all over the Europe showcasing young Wolfgang's amazing skills in playing and composing.

When Mozart got older he needed a new concept to earn money. This was composing music that pleases the crowd. This means more calculated structures and avoidance on complexity. This is why there is so little counterpoint in music of adult Mozart. His music has complexity but it could have been much more complex had he composed purely out of musical ambition. Older Mozart spend money like there was no tomorrow and he had to compose "commercial music". His operas are the best example of this. Mozart used his life experience to compose music that appeals to people.

[Valentino]

I'd say that a piano concerto like no. 24 is not exactly a crowd pleaser, but that's me.

[Josquin des Prez]

This is why there is so little counterpoint in music of adult Mozart.

I see you haven't down your homework, 71 dB. That's pretty sloppy behavior. 

With maturity, Mozart's music becomes increasingly rich in counterpoint, often to the point of saturation. By contrast, there's very little use of contrapuntal texture in his early music, and the few examples of fugal writing from this period are quite clumsy.

I didn't know that being a 'free thinker' implied ignorance and the spreading of misinformations.

[Steve]

Edit: Misread your post

Yes, you could argue that. Greatness in art cannot be measured objectively. The objective merits come in through study of music theory in structure, harmony, and the sorts. Yet, these merits are not observed based on value judgments (instead favoring terms such as 'effective' and 'ineffective' to those such as 'good' and 'bad'). As you can see, if we used the reverse reasoning, you would argue music peaked with the Romantics (or the serialists) and everything before it is merely a progression of musical greatness. This, of course, is absurd. The reason the 9th is great, and why Beethoven is a great composer, is because he was a progressive while also a master of previous forms. It's the nature of reason and critical consensus that this marks true genial greatness. Yet, this does not mean all music that he wrote that was not in some way progressive or revolutionary is inferior. There are many fans of Baroque music who are perfectly content with overtures from Telemann and cantatas from Bach, and could easily make the argument that greatness peaked with these composers. They were geniuses, mastered old forms, introduced new forms, thus, the preference of particular forms is subjective, but certainly does not deem the music superior to all else. As for the Telemann overture, it would depend on which one you are talking about in particular.

Yes, it is true that not all musical progression moves toward greatness, but you must take into account the development of the composer's skills into orchestration. Mozart's Violin Concertos were written at a time when his powers of composition were not yet fully developed. The cantatas of Bach could be considered the finest example of musicianship in that genre (as could the Brandenberg Concerti), but Mozart's Violin Concertos were written long before the violin acquired virtuoso status and it received due attention.

Sorry for the mistake.