Composers who don't sacrifice form for expression

[Slieep]

Hey. I'm not exactly new to classical, although I do lack in formal training, but I figured out I'd post that here.

I really like Mozart's late piano concertos and symphonies. They just seem to make a perfect sense. Every note is inevitable. The melodies are great, of course - but what really makes these compositions so powerful is form. Of course, all great composers are elegant, but Mozart in particular seems the best in this regard, as if his works were a tribute to reason and logic or something.

I suppose very little beats Mozart, but still - are there any other classical (or romantic/classical) composers who write like that? Specific recordings would be preferable, if possible. Thanks

[DavidW]

Your reaction to Mozart is extremely personal, so who knows if you would react the same way to another composer?  If you want to try real masters of form, try baroque composers especially Bach.  And if you really, really love complex forms realized elegantly, try Webern.  If you simply enjoy the classical style you might want to also try Haydn.

[BachQ]

Every note is inevitable *** as if his works were a tribute to reason and logic or something.

I suppose very little beats Mozart, but still - are there any other classical (or romantic/classical) composers who write like that?

This also applies to Beethoven and Brahms.  In fact, it applies 100% to Brahms, where every note is "inevitable" and no notes are superfluous ........  0:)

[jochanaan]

There are many major composers whose emotional intensity is matched by their mastery of form.  Beethoven and Brahms, of course; but also Mendelssohn, Bruckner, Mahler, even Tchaikovsky in certain pieces (Symphonies #5 and #6, the Piano Trio).  In fact, that's one of the marks of a truly great composer.

[hornteacher]

I would throw Dvorak into that group as well, who learned a lot from Brahms.  I think in general the "traditional" Romantics (Mendelssohn, Brahms, Dvorak, etc) are some of the best examples of blending emotion with form, as opposed to the radicals (Liszt, Wagner, etc) who did not let traditional forms get in the way of the emotional intent of their music.

[Slieep]

Thanks guys! I am very familiar with all the composers here except for Webern, who Ive never tried out (since I don't really enjoy Schoenberg - yet? - and they're supposedly similar), but perhaps I wasn't clear enough. Mozart is just very elegant... he goes from storm to calm within the space of a few notes and it still seems to make a perfect sense. There are tons of repeated themes. It's as if he had the entire composition in his head and then he wrote it down - not in stages. It could be a personal reaction like you say. Oh well.

[jochanaan]

Thanks guys! I am very familiar with all the composers here except for Webern, who Ive never tried out (since I don't really enjoy Schoenberg - yet? - and they're supposedly similar), but perhaps I wasn't clear enough. Mozart is just very elegant... he goes from storm to calm within the space of a few notes and it still seems to make a perfect sense. There are tons of repeated themes. It's as if he had the entire composition in his head and then he wrote it down - not in stages. It could be a personal reaction like you say. Oh well.

I've read that Mozart once described his compositional process much like that; he heard the piece "all at once," and wrote as if he were taking dictation.  Beethoven, on the other hand, would write 13, 14, even 16 different versions of a melody before he was satisfied--yet his music in its final form also has that inevitability.  It's not a matter of "suppressing" emotion to get at good form; it's more using form to heighten and focus emotion.

[karlhenning]

I am unceasingly fascinated with how inevitability and notes get associated.

[BachQ]

We also note the inevitability ........

[CK]

It's as if he had the entire composition in his head and then he wrote it down - not in stages.

Exactly what he did.  He would compose music in his head (usually more than one at a time) , then he would write the notes down while talking to his wife Constanze.

[jochanaan]

Exactly what he did.  He would compose music in his head (usually more than one at a time) , then he would write the notes down while talking to his wife Constanze.

Or sometimes while shooting pool. 

[karlhenning]

I've read that Mozart once described his compositional process much like that; he heard the piece "all at once," and wrote as if he were taking dictation.

And yet, it seems that was not the method involved in (e.g.) the set of 'Haydn' quartets.  So there was some threshold of composition even for Mozart, beneath which the music emerged with 'coasting' effort, and above which . . . not.

[Josquin des Prez]

And yet, it seems that was not the method involved in (e.g.) the set of 'Haydn' quartets.  So there was some threshold of composition even for Mozart, beneath which the music emerged with 'coasting' effort, and above which . . . not.

My guess is that there has always been a threshold for Mozart, it just mostly happened in his head thanks to his near perfect mnemonic abilities. The fact he never needed to write things down doesn't mean it wasn't happening, so the Haydn Quartets may not be such an isolated event, he merely felt necessary to use more conventional means in this instance due the considerable need to reformulate his own technique and aesthetic principles.

[jochanaan]

And yet, it seems that was not the method involved in (e.g.) the set of 'Haydn' quartets.  So there was some threshold of composition even for Mozart, beneath which the music emerged with 'coasting' effort, and above which . . . not.

So it would appear.  And weren't the Haydn quartets the most radical things he'd written up to that time?  He apparently tried deliberately to expand his own musical vocabulary with these pieces; that's not easy even for a Mozart.

[quintett op.57]

I am unceasingly fascinated with how inevitability and notes get associated.

I would really like to witness this scene : A GMGer meets Monteverdi, Franck or any composer of "non-inevitable notes" type and tells him (about one of his works) : "This, you could have avoided, this note is superfluous, try this instead..."   

[Saul]

Mendelssohn for sure, and Chopin too.

[abidoful]

OLEN TEEMOJENI ORJA (I'm a slave to my themes)- Jean Sibelius

Try Sibelius, especially symphonies 4-7, esp. nr 7

[jowcol]

. Mozart is just very elegant... he goes from storm to calm within the space of a few notes and it still seems to make a perfect sense. There are tons of repeated themes. It's as if he had the entire composition in his head and then he wrote it down - not in stages. It could be a personal reaction like you say. Oh well.

It's funny, but I tend to find Bach more inevitable than Mozart.  A great artist sounds inevitable-- but not boring.   

I am unceasingly fascinated with how inevitability and notes get associated.

I found it interesting that Stravinsky (most of his mid-later stuff is "inevitable"), described the composing process as selective perception.  (Like a sculptor who just cuts away the marble that does not belong.)  Be it was clear that Stravinsky didn't have it all in his mind- but rather a problem he wanted to solve. 

[False_Dmitry]

If you simply enjoy the classical style you might want to also try Haydn.

Yes, yes, yes   Haydn's mastery of form is so effortless that it's sheer joy to hear him moulding it to his own ends.

And, of course, that Beethoven chap knew a thing or two about form, too

A third composer - about whom we've been chatting recently on another thread - is Hummel, and his chamber music is a pleasure to listen to...  or, if you are a fair-to-middling pianist or violinist, to play through for yourself.  Play the music yourself, and you'll be amazed how quickly the composer yields up his secrets on form

[drogulus]

There are many major composers whose emotional intensity is matched by their mastery of form.  Beethoven and Brahms, of course; but also Mendelssohn, Bruckner, Mahler, even Tchaikovsky in certain pieces (Symphonies #5 and #6, the Piano Trio).  In fact, that's one of the marks of a truly great composer.

   

     Some composers are foundational, or at least elements of listener psychology say so. We tend to hear Beethoven as inevitable and Bruckner as "evitable", largely because of their relative positions against a template Beethoven was largely responsible for. Yet, even this generally objective view has hidden subjective components that mean we're bound to hear these composers in this way. The great majority of music listeners have been educated, formally or otherwise, to hear Beethoven as the default and Bruckner as the departure. Learning new composers involves unlearning the strangeness of "evitabilty" enough to connect the parts but not so much that the differences lose their uniqueness.