What period of romanticism do you prefer?

[kyjo]

Before you vote, let me clarify that I am dividing the sub-periods of the Romantic Era based on compositional style, not dates. Below is how I would define each period/style:

Early romantic: Not yet weaned off classical models, but with Romantic lyricism and drama. I would classify late Beethoven, late Schubert, Hummel, Spohr, Chopin, Rossini and Mendelssohn as early romantic.

Mid-romantic: More depth and complexity than the early romantic period, but not as harmonically complex or melodramatic as the late romantic period. I would classify Schumann, Brahms, Dvorak and Verdi as mid-romantic.

Late romantic: Harmonic lushness and occasional dissonance, complex, colorful orchestration, and high-tension drama are all characteristics of this period. Liszt, Wagner, Tchaikovsky, Bruckner, Mahler, R. Strauss, Elgar, Rachmaninov, Rimsky-Korsakov, Grieg and (early to mid-period) Sibelius are the most significant of the many composers whom I would classify as late-romantic. Even composers who lived as late as Atterberg (who died in 1974) composed in a late-romantic style.

Neo-romantic:  More a style than an era, neo-romanticism is a movement that took shape in the 1930s and 40s and is still going strong today. Neo-romantic music could best be described as incorporating Romantic elements such as emotional intensity and long-limbed lyricism in a modern framework, with dissonance present but never overbearing. Composers who I would classify as neo-romantic include Barber, Walton, Hanson and Diamond. Keep in mind that all 20th century composers who embraced tonality did not necessarily compose in a neo-romantic style. Shostakovich, for example, very rarely abandoned tonality, but none of his music could be described as neo-romantic.

Anyway, I voted for the late romantic period, much as I love the neo-romantic composers. So much of the music from this period just hits me like a ton of bricks with its sumptuous harmonic voicings and passionate lyricism and drama.

[Mirror Image]

Good poll, Kyle! I voted for Neo-Romantic. As much as I love late-Romanticism, I can't shake the effect composers like Vaughan Williams, Barber, Villa-Lobos, Diamond, Bloch, etc. have had on me as a listener.

[kyjo]

Good poll, Kyle! I voted for Neo-Romantic. As much as I love late-Romanticism, I can't shake the effect composers like Vaughan Williams, Barber, Villa-Lobos, Diamond, Bloch, etc. have had on me as a listener.

Thanks, John! Yeah, it was a tough choice for me between late-romantic and neo-romantic, but at least you voted for the latter! Interesting that you think of Villa-Lobos as a neo-romantic composer, but I can see where you're coming from. His symphonies and PCs, especially, have connections to the Romantic tradition.

[Brian]

Before you vote, let me clarify that I am dividing the sub-periods of the Romantic Era based on compositional style, not dates. Below is how I would define each period/style:

Early romantic: Not yet weaned off classical models, but with Romantic lyricism and drama. I would classify late Beethoven, late Schubert, Hummel, Spohr, Chopin, Rossini and Mendelssohn as early romantic.

Mid-romantic: More depth and complexity than the early romantic period, but not as harmonically complex or melodramatic as the late romantic period. I would classify Schumann, Brahms, Dvorak and Verdi as mid-romantic.

Schumann had "more depth and complexity" than "late Beethoven"? I suppose you must be working from a baseline of The Average/Typical Composer, in which case you could argue this for, say, Kalinnikov vs. Ries. If you could argue it even then.

EDIT: Off-topic and irrelevant, but is there (do you think, Kyle) a general trend toward "more depth and complexity" over the course of music history from the Renaissance onward?

[Mirror Image]

Thanks, John! Yeah, it was a tough choice for me between late-romantic and neo-romantic, but at least you voted for the latter! Interesting that you think of Villa-Lobos as a neo-romantic composer, but I can see where you're coming from. His symphonies and PCs, especially, have connections to the Romantic tradition.

I would say that there's a lot of VL's music that has ties with Romanticism. Those atmospheric harmonies and enchanting melodies always seem to evoke a far away land.

[kyjo]

Schumann had "more depth and complexity" than "late Beethoven"? I suppose you must be working from a baseline of The Average/Typical Composer, in which case you could argue this for, say, Kalinnikov vs. Ries. If you could argue it even then.

I was speaking generally, Brian. I should have stated that late Beethoven and Schubert were exceptions to this self-imposed "rule" of mine. I'm going to listen to Beethoven's late SQs in the near future and yes, what deep and complex pieces they are!

BTW Brian, can we just be friends? I apologized to you about my reply to your post in the "unsung" thread, but you didn't seem to accept my apology.

[kyjo]

I would say that there's a lot of VL's music that has ties with Romanticism. Those atmospheric harmonies and enchanting melodies always seem to evoke a far away land.

True, John. I've always thought of V-L's music as being a highly successful blend of impressionism, neo-classicism, barbarism (if such a musical term exists ) and romanticism.

[PaulR]

Late-Romantic for me.  Though I don't have much experience with the Neo-Romantics (I don't count anyone you listed as "neo-Romantic" composers, as I think of the term as a Post-Modernist reaction away from the modernist serialism techniques of the mid-20th century).

But I love all periods of romanticism, even the Romantic at heart classicist Felix Mendelssohn! 

[Mirror Image]

True, John. I've always thought of V-L's music as being a highly successful blend of impressionism, neo-classicism, barbarism (if such a musical term exists ) and romanticism.

How about we use the word primitivism? I like the sound of that better than barbarism. But, yes, I agree with your assessment of VL's style.

[kyjo]

How about we use the word primitivism? I like the sound of that better than barbarism. But, yes, I agree with your assessment of VL's style.

Yes, that's the word I was looking for!

[kyjo]

Though I don't have much experience with the Neo-Romantics (I don't count anyone you listed as "neo-Romantic" composers, as I think of the term as a Post-Modernist reaction away from the modernist serialism techniques of the mid-20th century).

Hmmmmm.....If you don't count Barber, Walton, Hanson and Diamond as "neo-romantic", then who would you count as such? They all composed music that reacted against the prevailing trends of the time (serialism etc.).

[Brian]

BTW Brian, can we just be friends? I apologized to you about my reply to your post in the "unsung" thread, but you didn't seem to accept my apology.

Of course we can. I think I read that, but honestly, I've been moving to a new place over the past week (and the next week), and there's so much packing, unpacking, planning, shopping, etc., that I can barely remember the thread of a GMG conversation. That cello concerto post last night was the most effort I've put in all week. 

[mszczuj]

Chopin should be late romantic not early.

[PaulR]

Hmmmmm.....If you don't count Barber, Walton, Hanson and Diamond as "neo-romantic", then who would you count as such? They all composed music that reacted against the prevailing trends of the time (serialism etc.).

I don't think Romanticism as we know from late romanticism ever really died.  While the majority of composers history remembers today are Serialist, they were still the minority of composers of the time.  Also the prevailing trends of serialism was also centered around Germany, the United States and the UK being relatively conservative musically.  They might have been composing conventional music with the serial revolution, but I don't think it was that they were really competing against them as a reaction.

For "who" would be Neo-Romantic: Penderecki, Lutoslawski after style change.  Rochberg.

[kyjo]

Of course we can. I think I read that, but honestly, I've been moving to a new place over the past week (and the next week), and there's so much packing, unpacking, planning, shopping, etc., that I can barely remember the thread of a GMG conversation. That cello concerto post last night was the most effort I've put in all week. 

I know how it feels to be busy, Brian! Fall is always such a busy season for me, it seems.

[PaulR]

Chopin should be late romantic not early.

If anything, he would be middle romantic.

[kyjo]

Chopin should be late romantic not early.

And your reasoning for this? He did have an influence on late-romantic composers such as Liszt and Rachmaninov, but where in his output can the chromatic tension and great outbursts of passion of the late-romantics be found? Just curious.

[kyjo]

I don't think Romanticism as we know from late romanticism ever really died.  While the majority of composers history remembers today are Serialist, they were still the minority of composers of the time.  Also the prevailing trends of serialism was also centered around Germany, the United States and the UK being relatively conservative musically.  They might have been composing conventional music with the serial revolution, but I don't think it was that they were really competing against them as a reaction.

For "who" would be Neo-Romantic: Penderecki, Lutoslawski after style change.  Rochberg.

You are absolutely correct in saying that Romanticism has never died. Many people believe this, but it is most certainly not true. There are a good many composers alive today who continue to draw on the Romantic tradition-John Adams, Aho, Penderecki (whom you mentioned), Broadstock and Lindberg, just to name a few. I certainly agree with your choices of Penderecki and Rochberg. It never occurred to me that Lutoslawski's music is neo-romantic, though.

[kyjo]

If anything, he would be middle romantic.

You could argue that. A lot of his later works have an inwardness that foreshadow Brahms' late piano works.

[PaulR]

Lutoslawki only traces, it could have been an error of including him on my part.