Mozart

[Madiel]

As someone who has long known the piano sonatas... my appreciation of Mozart grew considerably once I found out about the piano concertos.

[Florestan]

I'd say that to deny  how much greater their overall achievement is, is underestimating the piano concertos.

Nobody underestimates the piano concertos. The only underestimation going on here is of the piano sonatas.

[Que]

Nobody underestimates the piano concertos. The only underestimation going on here is of the piano sonatas.

+1 *


* Including Fantasias

[Leo K.]

Nobody underestimates the piano concertos. The only underestimation going on here is of the piano sonatas.

Thank you.

[Mandryka]

I'd say that to deny  how much greater their overall achievement is, is underestimating the piano concertos.

Mozart took the (piano) concerto genre from comparably modest scale and scope it had with the Bach sons etc. and transformed it and created about 20 great works, still all different from each other. He did nothing like this with the piano sonata. The sonatas are all good, there are some remarkable ones (like the c minor or the last one) but Mozart himself apparently cared so little about the genre (or there was just very little demand) that after K 333 he only wrote a handful, one of which is a tiny sonatina (545).
Apparently the K numbers of the earlier ones are off, the earliest six stem already from 1775 (their revised edition K numbers are in the 180s, not 280s) and 330-333 might be as early as 1778 or as late as 1782). If this dating is correct, the earliest set is among the most accomplished works of that time; I still find the violin concerti and a few symphonies from that period more interesting.

Anyway, as a body of work they don't come close to Mozart's piano concertos or Beethoven's piano sonatas either within each composers oeuvre or in the history of the genre.
Interestingly, the grandest sonatas are all from the period of the great piano concertos, namely K 457 c minor as well as the two pianos K 448 and the 4 hands K 497

They are good, some even great because Mozart is generally very good, regardless of genre, but I don't think he did anything as special here as with many the piano concertos or a lot of the mature chamber. music, the last 4 symphonies etc.

Jo, have you read any of John Irving's books on Mozart's keyboard sonatas? Would you recommend them? I quite like the music and wouldn't mind exploring them a bit more.

[Jo498]

No, I haven't done any reading on the piano sonatas besides what might have been in general books/essays on Mozart (lke Einstein's, Knepler's...) or on Classical music in general. Maybe that's why I supposedly "underestimate" them.

I do admit that IMO some of them come close to "Mozart on autopilot" (although still in a non-offensive way, not like flute quartets...) and I have the distinct impression that he was not that interested in the genre in his most creative periods.
Or to put it in a different perspective, although the differences are small, I also have the impression that he was more interested in the piano-violin-sonata but this might be because there are no Haydn violin sonatas and I probably haven't heard any other 1770s-80 piano + violin sonatas whereas I have heard piano sonatas by Bach sons, Haydn, maybe even other contemporaries. Or because the interaction makes piano+violin more attractive (but I don't feel like that in the case of e.g. Beethoven or Schubert).

As I wrote above, it seems that many of the exceptions, namely the c minor, the two piano K 448 and the grandest of the 4-hand sonatas 497 were written at the same time as his great piano concertos 450-503.

[Mandryka]

No, I haven't done any reading on the piano sonatas besides what might have been in general books/essays on Mozart (lke Einstein's, Knepler's...) or on Classical music in general. Maybe that's why I supposedly "underestimate" them.

I do admit that IMO some of them come close to "Mozart on autopilot" (although still in a non-offensive way, not like flute quartets...) and I have the distinct impression that he was not that interested in the genre in his most creative periods.
Or to put it in a different perspective, although the differences are small, I also have the impression that he was more interested in the piano-violin-sonata but this might be because there are no Haydn violin sonatas and I probably haven't heard any other 1770s-80 piano + violin sonatas whereas I have heard piano sonatas by Bach sons, Haydn, maybe even other contemporaries. Or because the interaction makes piano+violin more attractive (but I don't feel like that in the case of e.g. Beethoven or Schubert).

As I wrote above, it seems that many of the exceptions, namely the c minor, the two piano K 448 and the grandest of the 4-hand sonatas 497 were written at the same time as his great piano concertos 450-503.

I've ordered a couple of them from amazon on a sale or return basis. Will report back.

[Scion7]

... and I have the distinct impression that he was not that interested in the genre in his most creative periods.

Can't agree with that - his last four piano sonatas are true masterpieces.

[Madiel]

Any attempt at comparison does have to take into account when the works were written. It makes no real sense to compare pre-Vienna piano sonatas with Vienna-period concertos.

If it's generally considered that the earlier piano concertos are not on the same level as the Vienna series, it can hardly be surprising that the earlier piano sonatas also don't reach that level.

[Spotted Horses]

I can recognize the larger scale of the Piano Concerti compared with the Sonatas, and that the sonatas are a more intimate form. I do not know how to quantify the quality of the works, except in terms of my enjoyment and feeling of awe at Mozart's creation, which I experience to a similar level in some of the Sonatas.

[Jo498]

The dating of the early sonatas is apparently still not exactly established in some cases, see above. I used to go by the K numbers, so I thought that the earliest six were from the same time as the extraordinary concerto K 271, in fact they seem closer to the very first concerto K 175 about two years earlier.
And the 4 sonatas K 330-333 might be 1778 and published several years later, or they might have been written in his first two years in Vienna.

As Mozart wrote apparently very little without a specific occasion (or at least provisional agreement with a publisher or so), it's hardly surprising that in 1784-86 he wrote few sonatas because he was busy with concerti (and Figaro). The piano sonata also was not a "big" genre but mostly domestic or teaching music although the brilliant two piano sonata and the c minor + fantasy might go beyond that, it was mainly with Beethoven (or maybe Clementi etc. in between Mozart and Beethoven) that sonatas could also become virtuoso pieces for public performances.
So one could argue that Mozart simply lacked the occasion to write a bunch of sonatas as ambitious as e.g the K 515/16 string quintets or the last 3 symphonies. (The very last sonata might have been intended for a set that never was composed.)
But for some reason he did it with string quintets, quartets, piano quartets, all of which hardly as "natural" for a pianist as solo sonatas.
In the end, I don't care about the causes or reasons. Neither do I think that Mozart's sonatas are weak. It's just obvious to me that they don't the the "weight" his string quartets or piano concertos have, just like few people would claim Beethoven's violin sonatas or string trios would be a body of work comparable to the piano sonatas or symphonies.

[Scion7]

....  few people would claim Beethoven's violin sonatas ...

the sonatas Op.47 and Op.96 surely rate with his great compositions ...

[Florestan]

The piano sonata also was not a "big" genre but mostly domestic or teaching music although the brilliant two piano sonata and the c minor + fantasy might go beyond that, it was mainly with Beethoven (or maybe Clementi etc. in between Mozart and Beethoven) that sonatas could also become virtuoso pieces for public performances.

This is a commonly held yet mistaken view.

Incidentally, I'm currently reading this book:



On page 54, Hamilton addresses this very issue:

Dazzling extempore treatment of catchy tunes was easier for audiences to digest
than less deliberately populist fare, especially multi-movement works of serious
intent that often had not even been composed with the possibility in mind of
performance before a large public. Into this category undoubtedly fall the sonatas
of Beethoven, which were regarded for the first decades of the nineteenth century as
unlikely fare indeed for a public concert. According to Mary Sue Morrow's study
of Viennese concerts in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, there is
no evidence of any solo piano sonata being publicly performed in Vienna between
the years 1760 and 1810—''non-improvisational solo material occurred only
rarely.''51 When sonatas were eventually programmed at all, it was often only single
movements that were given, although Mendelssohn, after having regularly per-
formed Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata at private soire ́es in Munich and elsewhere,
performed it complete at a public concert at the Singakademie in Berlin toward the
end of 1832.52 Ignaz Moscheles a few years later included the Tempest and Les adieux
Sonatas (and one by Weber) in his first (1837) ''historical soire ́e'' before a small
audience in London. This, amazingly, included some pieces by Bach and Scarlatti
played on the harpsichord as well as songs by Mendelssohn and Dussek to lighten
the strain, but the program was still extremely severe for the era and not likely to
fill a large hall.

So one could argue that Mozart simply lacked the occasion to write a bunch of sonatas as ambitious as e.g the K 515/16 string quintets or the last 3 symphonies.

One could argue, more truthful to the facts, something different, ie that the piano sonata as a genre was in Mozart's time not as "ambitious" as the chamber music or the symphony and the expectations that they (should) be as "profound" and "weighty" as the latter two are misplaced.

In the end, I don't care about the causes or reasons. Neither do I think that Mozart's sonatas are weak. It's just obvious to me that they don't the the "weight" his string quartets or piano concertos have, just like few people would claim Beethoven's violin sonatas or string trios would be a body of work comparable to the piano sonatas or symphonies.

See above. Maybe your appreciation for Mozart's piano sonatas would increase if you stopped comparing them either to contemporary genres very different in scope and functionality or to piano sonatas from a later age when the genre was transformed completely.

[Mandryka]

Yes, Florestan. But something needs explaining. In 1740s Bach was writing profound and weighty music for domestic keyboards, and your (quite plausible) suggestion is that by the 1770s keyboard sonatas were no longer seen as appropriate vehicles for such music. WTF?!!!!!!!

Maybe this is where Bach is the anomaly. I don't know enough about Couperin and Scarlatti and Handel to comment.

[Florestan]

Yes, Florestan. But something needs explaining. In 1740s Bach was writing profound and weighty music for domestic keyboards, and your (quite plausible) suggestion is that by the 1770s keyboard sonatas were no longer seen as appropriate vehicles for such music. WTF?!!!!!!!

First, it's not my suggestion, it's a claim made by scholars who have studied the issue in depth. Second, you seem to forget the considerable gap between Bach's old-fashioned aesthetic and the Galant Style and Empfindsamer Stil that were the modernist rage in the 1770s. Third, what specific keyboard works by Bach do you refer to when saying they are profound and weighty?

[Mandryka]

Third, what specific keyboard works by Bach do you refer to when saying they are profound and weighty?

For weightiness, The Art of Fugue. For profundity, The Goldberg Variations.

I don't know whether Scarlatti's 30 Essercizi or Couperin's L'Art de Toucher le Clavecin are as systematic an exploration of effects and structures as AoF -- that would give them what I'm calling weightiness. And I don't know whether the pieces in variation form in the Handel suites have hidden symmetries and numerological cyphers like The Goldberg Variations -- which would give it profundity.   

It would be interesting to think of Bach's own gallant keyboard music to see whether it is weighty and profound. I think so:   the second duetto from Clavier Ubung III, BWV 803, IMO, is gallant and I'd say it is one of the most profound pieces of music ever written - because of its rhetorical structure.  The way the gallant theme returns sublimated after its battle with the central stile antico section.  It's domestic too -- you could play it on clavichords.

[Scion7]

Let's be clear:  there was nothing about Bach that was "old-fashioned."
He is one of the four or five greatest composers in history.

PSA over, carry on ....

[Madiel]

Let's be clear:  there was nothing about Bach that was "old-fashioned."
He is one of the four or five greatest composers in history.

PSA over, carry on ....

I don't understand how you think those sentences relate to each other. It's fairly well-established that Bach was regarded as old-fashioned shortly after or even during his lifetime. How he came to be regarded a couple of centuries later is totally irrelevant.

Nor do I understand how you think that "old-fashioned" means "not great". Shakespeare is undeniably not modern. People who love Shakespeare do not claim that his STYLE is timeless.

[Mandryka]

Let's be clear:  there was nothing about Bach that was "old-fashioned."

I think in fact that it is crass to suggest that Bach was an old fashioned composer, by 18th century standards. He wrote so much galant music! Without thinking too hard, I'd say BWV 971, the trio sonata in opfer and BWV 825 are all both simple and charming. What is probably true is that, while he was able to make use of galanterie, he also retained an interest in the baroque and virtuosity. He wasn't doctrinaire.


I also think there is severe and complex music by Mozart, he also wasn't wedded to galanterie in a doctrinaire way . 

[Jo498]

the sonatas Op.47 and Op.96 surely rate with his great compositions ...

The whole context of this debate is about bodies of works. Of course Beethoven wrote some great violin sonatas. But as a whole they are in no way comparable to the importance of the piano sonatas or symphonies. I basically claim the same about Mozart's piano sonatas.