- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,415
- Liked Posts:
- 1,155
- Location:
- NW Suburbs
My favorite teams
P. I. Tchaikovsky.
Lol, homo.P. I. Tchaikovsky.
My grandfather immigrated from Salzburg...so I feel that I have to say Mozart.
Truth is, I am a fan of Frederic Chopin.
My grandfather immigrated from Salzburg...so I feel that I have to say Mozart.
Truth is, I am a fan of Frederic Chopin.
[video=youtube;Bj5Mp31nZlA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj5Mp31nZlA[/video]
Out of the three listed, Beethoven. He single-handedly ushered in the Romantic period, contributed several compositional techniques that revolutionized the sonata form (which is utilized in every symphony and most other large scale pieces), and did some other bafflingly complex shit that most people will never notice (the "melody" in the intro of the Sonata Pathetique comes back as the bass line in the 2nd movement, for example [and no one, no one, was thinking about carrying themes across movements back then]). Hell, every major composer abandoned the symphony for 6 fucking years after the 9th came out because they just didn't think they could compete. It wasn't until Berlioz premiered the Symphonie Fantastique in 1830 that composers were once again comfortable undertaking the symphonic form; and that was primarily because Berlioz opened a door to a vastly different way of thinking about how to construct a symphony that allowed composers to no longer have to deal with the looming shadow of Beethoven.
Mozart tends to be overrated in my opinion. He wrote beautifully, but didn't really bring anything new to the art and was widely considered outdated during the last several years of his life (despite what movies and such would like you to believe, the reason he died poor was because most people viewed him as being a composer of an "old style" and didn't really want to commission new compositions from him). What he did contribute was a melding of Italian operatic traditions with Germanic instrumentalism; which is why, even in his instrumental pieces, the melodic lines more closely resemble a vocal part than most had in prior eras. I'd probably appreciate him more if I were more of an opera guy, but opera isn't really my thing outside a few specific cases.
Bach was pretty much the culmination of the high Baroque. If you guys haven't heard of him, listen to some Dieterich Buxtehude (his organ works are a good place to start); Bach's composition style changed dramatically after he took a leave to go visit Buxtehude in Lübeck. But anyways, one of the reasons J.S. kicks so much ass (several of his sons actually did a lot to usher in the Classical era too, btw) is that he pretty much perfected the codification of tonalism. In most prior Baroque and earlier styles there were instances of harmonic resolutions that we would find "strange," "unsatisfying," or are against what theorists consider "proper" resolutions of a harmony; Bach's middle and late period works are almost completely void of such things which is one of the primary reasons we find his music so pleasant. That and he tended to be very strict with his approaches to form, which is also something people tend to enjoy since it breaks a piece down into easily identifiable and digestible sections.
Lol, homo.