Bach vs. Beethoven!

[Ten thumbs]

Even today, Liszt et al would not go down well if one took away the fireworks. I think we should also bear in mind that some of the fancy figuration was extremely innovative. One could also argue that most but not all of the ornamentation in Bach is non-structural and superfluous on modern instruments but I for one consider it an essential part of his style. Incidentally, very difficult concertos that lack flamboyance are very hard on the performer because not all of the audience are in the know. 

[DavidW]

Oh boy emotionally charged rhetoric!  Don't you just love these threads?

Dave will Bach eclipse Beethoven for you?  As you get into Bach he will for awhile, because you will be reveling in your reevaluation of his music, it will sound different to you and fresh and you might want to explore more of his music as well.  Whether you like one more than another takes time to see.  I got into Bach last year, and I'm still just in the phase of really experiencing and embracing his music.  I can't move onto the decision until the discovery phase, you know what I mean?  It takes along time, but it's worth a slow journey, don't you think?

[BachQ]

Even today, Liszt et al would not go down well if one took away the fireworks. I think we should also bear in mind that some of the fancy figuration was extremely innovative. One could also argue that most but not all of the ornamentation in Bach is non-structural and superfluous on modern instruments but I for one consider it an essential part of his style. Incidentally, very difficult concertos that lack flamboyance are very hard on the performer because not all of the audience are in the know.  

I do not disagree with you. 

Every composer embarking on creating a concerto faces an intrinsic tension: "how do I unleash the virtuosity of the instrument and performer without compromising the architectural and structural integrity of the piece?"

Perhaps 99% of the listening pubic has no clue about how the hidden virtuosities in Brahms piano concerti are actually organically related to, integrated with, and indispensable to the concerto's underlying structure .......  For example, consider the fortissimo octave trills in Brahms D Minor Piano Concerto (1st mvt): they are simultaneously treacherously difficult for the pianist (even Barenboim routinely botches these) yet they represent the culmination of the motivic and organic framework initiated by Brahms in the opening measures. 

They are indispensable to the structure, yet are consummately virtuosic.  There is no compromise. 

Beethoven accomplishes this same feat with his 4th Piano Concerto: the virtuosity is a natural, organic, and indispensable culmination of the underlying structure of the composition.  There is no virtuosity for the sake of showmanship; rather, the virtuosity exists solely for the sake of coherence, integration, unification, and organic culmination of the composition's dramatic structure.  The virtuosity is a natural unleashing of the dramatic tension inherent in the composition.  The virtuosity thus slips past the casual listener, concealing its seamless and deeply-rooted difficulties.

Contrast Liszt's Totentanz in D Minor.  Although this is one of my favorite piano concertos, it is, nevertheless, about 50% glitz and showmanship.  It's a highly effective piece, but it's not anywhere near the same level of overall craftsmanship as the Brahms and Beethoven concerti discussed above. 

Whether you prefer Totentanz in D Minor to Brahms First PC in D Minor depends on what you value in music.  I happen to think that the true test of greatness addresses the issue of "whether any given composition can possibly be improved upon."  If you can identify and delete extraneous glitz and frills, then, in my opinion, the piece CAN be improved upon.  On the other hand, if all of the virtuosity is organically interwoven into the whole fabric of the composition while simultaneously representing the inevitable culmination and natural release of the underlying drama and tension of the composition, then that represents perfection.

[Chaszz]

1. Unfair in that the poll gives Beethoven the edge when there is no way to vote (that I can discover anyway).

2. I agree with the poster who calls Beethoven a drama queen. I have read (in a description by Prof. Charles Rosen, I believe) Beethoven's work described as having a continual moral earnestness that grates on the nerves of some people. That's it, exactly: he takes himself so seriously that it's almost caricature. Just settle down and make make music, boy; don't be in a continual state of crisis.

BACH easily.

[Hollywood]

My fav is and has always been Beethoven. Living here in Heiligenstadt I either see him (my oil portrait of him or one of the many statues of him here in Vienna) or I hear his music (on the radio and TV or coming from a window of some church or concert hall, etc.) almost everyday. I am forever surrounded by Beethoven. I live nearby to many of the houses he lived in here in Heiligenstadt and the Vienna Woods (that he enjoyed spending hours walking through) is also close by.

Now I must admit that I do enjoy Bach and he is my favorite Baroque composer.

[Josquin des Prez]

2. I agree with the poster who calls Beethoven a drama queen.

A drama queen is somebody who makes a big deal out of nothing. You really think that applies to Beethoven?