Mozart

Started by facehugger, April 06, 2007, 02:37:52 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Opus106

Quote from: edward on May 28, 2009, 12:28:08 PM
I'd like to think that the last couple of reviews I posted might rattle his self-belief, but I'm quite sure that no amount of conclusive evidence can.

HA!
Regards,
Navneeth

Herman

Here's the other one. Never mind the violist's hairdo. The music is great.



The signature is, of course, Loochey's. ;D

karlhenning

Quote from: Herman on May 28, 2009, 12:38:13 PM
Here's the other one. Never mind the violist's hairdo.

Gilligan!!!

Herman

usually there's one guy with funny hair in every string quartet

Dr. Dread


not edward

I've a great idea:

Let's get Mr Newman to post on rmcr. That way his trolling can meet the combined obnoxiousness of Tom Deacon, Jeffrey Powell and of course our own M Forever.

Now I've got the giggles. ;)
"I don't at all mind actively disliking a piece of contemporary music, but in order to feel happy about it I must consciously understand why I dislike it. Otherwise it remains in my mind as unfinished business."
-- Aaron Copland, The Pleasures of Music

karlhenning

Timing can, on occasion, be so strikingly peculiar, that one suspects a Divine Hand in all things.  I was driving back into Cambridge to fetch my Maria from her work, and tuned in to WCRB, and with improbable timeliness, I had the opportunity to listen to a Vanhal symphony in its entirety:

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 28, 2009, 04:46:40 PM
Timing can, on occasion, be so strikingly peculiar, that one suspects a Divine Hand in all things.  I was driving back into Cambridge to fetch my Maria from her work, and tuned in to WCRB, and with improbable timeliness, I had the opportunity to listen to a Vanhal symphony in its entirety:

I hope you enjoyed it as much as I usually do. Vanhal actually is a hugely underrated composer of highly enjoyable music. :)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Renaissance CO / Korchin / Oshiakaev (Oboe) - Marcello Oboe Concerto #2 in c 1st mvmt - Allegro moderato
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

karlhenning

Normally, on hearing a work by, say, Vanhal announced on WCRB (and I apologize in advance to ardent Vanhallians), I tend to retune the radio dial to another station.  But today, I decided to listen, and listen to the whole thing, primarily because it had been suggested that it was "actually" Vanhal who composed works "attributed" to MozartAll right, I thought; setting aside all questions of history and documents, let us consider if the composer of the work I am about to hear, could plausibly have composed mature Mozart.

I am going to consider three questions, and the comparison today was made all the easier by the fact that I have been listening to so much authentic Mozart all week. (And I do apologize to my neighbors who enjoy Vanhal;  I hate to seem to run down a 'grade-B' contemporary of Mozart, who was grade-triple-A fit to beat all grade-As.)

1.  Scoring (use of the orchestra).  I am afraid that on this head, the Vanhal symphony struck me as staggeringly unimaginative, on the whole.  On the plus side, there were some lovely solo-string passages (which modestly recalled the early Haydn symphonies I have been listening to).  But the use of the winds was witheringly dull.  There was not a single point at which the flutes, oboes or horns 'broke free' to play even a single independent measure;  all of the wind writing (without fail) was simply a slavish doubling of something already being covered in the strings.  The piece could have been composed for string orchestra alone, in other words, and the winds just added as an afterthought as a coloristic highlight.  I needn't tell anyone who has read any Mozart score, that the Salzburger could never be accused of such a paint-by-number approach to writing for the winds.

2.  Harmony.  There is a scatologically amusing exchange in Peter Shaeffer's Amadeus, in which Mozart is overheard saying, "Have you heard his [i.e., Salieri's] latest opera, The Chimney Sweep? Dog-shit.  Dried dog-shit. Tonic-and-dominant, tonic-and-dominant, tonic-and-dominant -- not one interesting modulation in the entire piece."  Subtract the tone of stagey scorn, and we have something close to a description of the Vanhal Symphony in F.  All of the harmony, all the chord sequences, all the harmonic motion of every phrase, is dutifully correct, and unexceptional.  There is nothing of the harmonic deftness and agility which can be found in practically any Mozart score which he composed past the age of 20.  He had already milled out all that dutiful harmonic broadcloth as a youth, you see;  so his compositional ear demanded flashes of inspiration.  The difference (if you like) between a square dance, and the tango (harmonically speaking).  The Vanhal is a thoroughly pleasant piece, mind you, but harmonically, it's Mozart as a 15-year-old.

3.  Composition/phrasing.  Essentially the same quarrel as (2.) above.  Nice work, but two orders of creativity beneath the mature Mozart.

I regret to have to report that, based purely on musical considerations, what I have heard of Vanhal takes him out of the running as any possible "ghost-writer" for Mozart.

(Which will take practically no one here by surprise, I trust.)

karlhenning

Gurn, can you forgive me?  0:)

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 28, 2009, 05:08:03 PM
Gurn, can you forgive me?  0:)

Absolutely, Karl. I'm the first to admit that Vanhal is no Mozart. In fact, I declare it!  But I will go on to say that his use of winds is absolutely typical for the time (mid-1770's at the latest), and that the use of winds which we cherish s much in Mozart actually originated with him. One of the great debts that music lovers can never fully repay. And the squareness of the beat was also typical (admired in fact), and we owe first Haydn, then Mozart, for making irregularity the hallmark of High Classic style. :)  In one of those rare moments when I feel like paraphrasing Herr Newman: context is the thing, you must know the context!  :D

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Mozarteum Orchestra Salzburg / Graf - K 366 #25 March from Idomeneo
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

karlhenning

Perfectly fair.  We should not normally punish these 'workmen' composers for doing their work stylishly and characteristically;  it is in comparison to the fiery creative spirits such as Haydn and Mozart that their works pale.

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 28, 2009, 05:28:33 PM
Perfectly fair.  We should not normally punish these 'workmen' composers for doing their work stylishly and characteristically;  it is in comparison to the fiery creative spirits such as Haydn and Mozart that their works pale.

(Quoted for truth). ;)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Mozarteum Orchestra Salzburg / Graf - K 248 March in F
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

Cato

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 28, 2009, 05:28:33 PM
Perfectly fair.  We should not normally punish these 'workmen' composers for doing their work stylishly and characteristically;  it is in comparison to the fiery creative spirits such as Haydn and Mozart that their works pale.

But have you considered the possibility that Vanhal deliberately composed an average symphony to deflect from his participation in The Mozart Conspiracy

If he composed a symphony in his own name with his true Mozart-talent, the jig and the jug would be up!   :o    :o

Calling Dan Brown!!!   $:)
"Meet Miss Ruth Sherwood, from Columbus, Ohio, the Middle of the Universe!"

- Brian Aherne introducing Rosalind Russell in  My Sister Eileen (1942)

snyprrr

A few weeks ago I got that ABQ Teldec box, and I admit I've never really "listened" to Mozart in gen., much less SQs 14-23, but in the spirit of all this, I've just been cycling through them. So then, this is my country boy overall first impression of Mozart in general.  And, I will admit, this coincidence of my first serious listen to...any... Mozart, with all this...swooning of late, isn't lost on me. But, this is what I heard when I listened.

The first thing I noticed (No.14 "Sunrise") was that Mozart used much more floral covering for his structures than Haydn...MORE NOTES!!! as the cliche goes. And the accompiment (sic) seemed so much more fleeting, moving from instrument to instrument, the onward...unfolding?... I've ALWAYS had a problem with the Haydn SQs since I plowed through them years ago (Naxos+)...Op.20/Mosaiques now on loan from the library...I don't know, but, Mozart's "sunrise" just made me go, oh...ok, that's it. Total improvised...poof...there it is.

And I'll have to say, for "classical" music, hrhmm, I instandly liked Mozart's No.15 in d minor better than I remember Haydn's 3 in the same key. I was obsessed with finding the perfect "classical" minor key SQ back then... still haven't found it, just my issue... but Mozart definitely has the "inevitable" melody I like... reminds me of Myaskovsky, haha :D ;D!

By the time I get to the famous No.19 "Dissonance" SQ, which seems slightly more special than 16-18, one thing I've noticed is that Mozart can't stay away from sounding "happy" more than anyone I've heard. Well, yea... this is the "Everything you've heard is true" thing where Mozart really HAS become the poster boy for "classical" music. Honestly, I can't tell if one guy wrote 'em, or all "classical" SQ composer's SQs sound something like this (much easier for me to tell, maybe, in minor keys). For me, an ignorant, No.19 and No.23 sound like a different person than the rest, more..."special"? No.23 really has a "late" sound compared to 14-18.

Oh, and I'm not saying nuthin...this is just my literal first impression. All I've heard listened to now is Haydn and Mozart SQs, and I don't have the time to be in a "classical" phase right now, ha!... or $$$!!!

But my old mum likes it... Haydn and Mozart SQs are the only ones she won't complain about. Maybe Glinka...that's it. Oy! Vey!

aaanyhooww... No.19 "Dissonance" is quite some piece of SQ, no? It just all has that "special" sound... not quite this, not quite that...just classic point-your-finger-at-it and say, "That's the way." I hear Webern.

So, as a "set", they're called the "Haydn" SQs, and they were written between 1782-85 according to my index.


snyprrr

Mozart SQ No.20 "Hoffmeister" jumped out at me from a packed of major key SQs. Besides "Dissonance" and No.23, what is you're favorite major key SQ by Mozart? And why?

And what of No.20 and No.22, both in D major? Any thoughts? No.20 seems to me extrovert, and No.22 sounds like another "sunrise"?

But "Hoffmeister" has a country jaunt to it, perhaps, some up beat quality, that immediately struck me from the rest. It seems if I go between Mozart and... Xenakis/Ligeti/Berio, say... or Brahms, then it helps me pick up on that... "thang" thing better when I'm listening to just basically "classical" era music for long periods.

snyprrr

Mozart "Prussian" SQs 21-23:

Just to finish up...does No.23 sound different to you, more "special"? It definitely has the most modern sound to me (other than No.19, but...) overall. Is it sleek and smooth and slightly elegiac? Keep in mind I've heard none of these SQs more @4 times so far. These are just first impressions.

21-22 have yet to make any "memory" impact on me, other than I thought No.21 in D major had a typical? "sunrise"? sound. It's very hard with me and major key classical era SQs. I would probably never buy a classical era cd of any kind with only major key works... but, that's my problem as they say... much less finding a classical SQ cd with ALL minor keys, ha. Please prove me wrong! ;D

Mozart

#177
The 20th string quartet is one of my favorite.

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/mTyhulF5PII


Yes...its good stuff no? Why doesn't this one get as much attention?


I'm also big on number 16 in e flat

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/HwlmFGScUFQ
"I am the musical tree, eat of my fruit and your spirit shall rejoiceth!"
- Amadeus 6:26

snyprrr

I was just perusing the last page of this thread and noticed the "Mozart" discussion has... "moved", haha...

Quote from: Cato on May 28, 2009, 05:39:36 PM
If he composed a symphony in his own name with his true Mozart-talent, the jig and the jug would be up!

See, all you have to do is put your "Stewey" cap on, and suddenly, all things do seem possible! Keep in mind that they're all frat boys sworn to secrecy! 8)

The more I think about it, the "Unknown Composer's" name HAD to be Luchesi. Think about it. Luchesi...the "lightbringer"...huh?...huh? What could BE more evil? :o Oh, I wish I would have found this ten years ago... :'(

Just think about it, you've all seen enough gangster movies...Don Luchesi... offers him...a deal...he can't... oh, this is too good!!! VitoVito!!!

Believe in Luchesi ???... or THEY will get you! :o :o :o (cue shock music)

He wrote the intro for the Dissonance Quartet whilst communing with...

snyprrr

Quote from: Mozart on May 28, 2009, 08:48:54 PMYes...its good stuff no? Why doesn't this one get as much attention?



It doesn't?




Quote from: Mozart on May 28, 2009, 08:48:54 PM
I'm also big on number 16 in e flat

I remember the darkish unison intro.