Not MORE Mozart?

[Serial_Apologist]

I can only repeat what I've said before - give 100 Music Students (each with more than five years' experience in 18th Century Harmony) the first eight bars of the melody of K488, and none of them would get what Mozart does (unless they already knew the piece, of course). (I would also add that there cannot be "perfection of Form" if there isn't also perfection of Harmony.) Mozza's "problem" is that he makes everything seem "simple" - it's only when you try to replicate what he's doing that you realize just how astonishing he was. (Again - and further apologies for repeating myself - he's like Fred Astaire, making everything look so easy; it's only when you try to copy what he does that you end up looking a clot on your backside on the floor.)

I don't know how much truth there is in this story, which would appear to bear out what you say ferney, but it has been claimed that when Schoenberg went to live in the States, young composers flocked to his class to find out how to produce his "effects". (I've always imagined them thinking, "Great, this stuff would make a lot of money from writing horror movie scores"). When, as is alleged, he made them study Mozart scores, and they complained that they had not come in order to waste time on such simple stuff, Schoenberg admonished them,saying that there was nothing simple about Mozart!

Edit
Prior to launcing into the late Beethovens, I listened to K464 yesterday afternoon. Aside from probably being longer than any of his symphonies, there are harmonies in this work, especially in the first movement, whose chromaticism (and contrapuntalism) looks not just to late Beethoven but beyond, even. Certainly in no ways describable as "simple".

[teamsaint]

I'm also not able to pass judgement on Mozart's mastery of harmony. The K516 Quintet is coming to my desert island - a profound, beautiful and uplifting work which I have loved listening to for 40 years or more.

talking of K516

Wonderful use of the Italian augmented sixth at the start of the second movement.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mnTNNATGy9w

http://musictheoryexamples.com/25A6.html

http://musictheoryexamples.com/25A6/A6k.pdf

The stuff that there is out there.

Amazing.

Further reading for those particularly interested in Mozarts G minor output.

http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/279/1/uk_bl_ethos_254655.pdf

[David-G]

I always feel as though I'm uttering heresy when I say I don't like Mozart, and I've thought a lot about it over the years. Undoubtedly much of it stems from my experience at the RNCM - I was made to play K332 (well, I wasn't told I had an option) and not only couldn't play it, but couldn't bear it either. At the end of the first year, I was thrown out - and rightly or wrongly assumed that it was mainly because I couldn't play - or bear - Mozart!

Interesting. This reminds me somewhat of when my piano teacher at school put Ravel's "Sonatine" on the music desk. I could not make head or tail of it, and after zero progress for three weeks he gave up and we went back to Beethoven. From that day to this, try as I might, I have never managed to like Ravel.

[french frank]

From that day to this, try as I might, I have never managed to like Ravel.

Of such experiences is attitude (and therefore 'taste') modified, I'm sure.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Interesting. This reminds me somewhat of when my piano teacher at school put Ravel's "Sonatine" on the music desk. I could not make head or tail of it, and after zero progress for three weeks he gave up and we went back to Beethoven. From that day to this, try as I might, I have never managed to like Ravel.

My university piano teacher tried to persuade me to learn Ravel's Sonatine. I didn't like it, though not to the extent that it put me off Ravel.

But last year, I decided to given Sonatine a second chance, buying the music and spending endless happy hours practising.

[peterthekeys]

Interesting. This reminds me somewhat of when my piano teacher at school put Ravel's "Sonatine" on the music desk. I could not make head or tail of it, and after zero progress for three weeks he gave up and we went back to Beethoven. From that day to this, try as I might, I have never managed to like Ravel.

You see, I'm exactly the opposite! The first piece which blew me away was by Ravel (it was "Bolero") and my first hearing of "Daphnis and Chloe" some years later was one of my peak musical experiences. I always seem to have had a basic empathy with late romantic and early 20th century music, and a corresponding dis-empathy with the first Viennese school (apart from Haydn.) (Whilst at the RNCM, we had sight-reading lessons (probably the only really useful thing which I got from my time there.) They were led by Terence Greaves, the dean of development: we were put into classes of 4 or 5; two of us would sight-read piano duets, and then get criticised by the rest of the group. Mr. Greaves once said to me that most people sightread music from the classical period fairly easily, but had problems with modern music - but I seemed to be the other way round.)

[peterthekeys]

I would also add that there cannot be "perfection of Form" if there isn't also perfection of Harmony.

But what is "perfection of harmony"? I couldn't define it personally. I can only point to harmony which I like - and it tends to be "complex" harmony rather than "simple" harmony (for example - my favourite composers include Ravel, Havergal Brian, Delius, John Ireland and Howells.) Worth stressing that in each case, I enjoy the whole work, not just the harmony.

I've often wondered if it's like someone coming to Britain from a country where food is normally highly spiced and seasoned (maybe southern India or Mexico) and then sitting down to a plate of meat and two veg. It might be the finest meat and two veg in the world, cooked by a Michelin 3 star chef to perfection of flavour and texture - but to your spice-conditioned immigrant, it would probably taste bland. But he might then go down the road, buy an Indian take-away, and really enjoy it. So I guess that I'm saying that if I listened to enough Mozart and Beethoven, I might well "get" them - but there's so much other fascinating music tempting me!

[cloughie]

My university piano teacher tried to persuade me to learn Ravel's Sonatine. I didn't like it, though not to the extent that it put me off Ravel.

But last year, I decided to given Sonatine a second chance, buying the music and spending endless happy hours practising.

...and now do you like it? It's a work I have long loved and if my piano skills ever get much better than now would like to play.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

But what is "perfection of harmony"?

Good point - what I meant is that there cannot be "perfection of form" if the harmony used to generate that form is not itself perfect for the job.

I couldn't define it personally. I can only point to harmony which I like - and it tends to be "complex" harmony rather than "simple" harmony (for example - my favourite composers include Ravel, Havergal Brian, Delius, John Ireland and Howells.)

But the harmony of Brian, Delius, Ireland and Howells is simplicity itself - stick an added note to a triad, then use this as a pivot note to the next added note chord. (Repeat until end.) Mozart's harmony is far more complex - that's why Ravel adored it.

if I listened to enough Mozart and Beethoven, I might well "get" them - but there's so much other fascinating music tempting me!

Nowt more fascinating than those beggars!

[Barbirollians]

I cannot get Malcolm Arnold's music at all - leaves me cold when it doesn't annoy me - his Symphony no 1 in particular I cannot stick .

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

...and now do you like it?

I certainly do.