A little Music History

Wagner tore up Beethoven's rulebook, with a little help from Berlioz.

Graham55, can you elaborate on the Berlioz - Wagner connection?

Wagner was enormously taken, and influenced, by Berlioz's use of a huge orchestra. It's astonishing that Berlioz wrote his 'Symphonie Fantastique' within a few years of Beethoven's death.

And there are those who think that some of the most celebrated music in 'Tristan' is a straight lift from Berlioz's 'Romeo et Juliette'. It's certainly remarkably similar!

G

Did Beethoven have a rule book? Please explain !

Crikey, listen to the final string quartets of Beethoven - Wagner is rarely this vague in his harmonic language.

Beethoven paved the way for the larger Romantic composers - Wagner, Berlioz, Bruckner, Mahler, etc.

Although, if you mention Wagner, you should also make reference to Liszt - the Wagner of the piano world. That can then be extended down through the likes of Alkan (Chopin was a fan), Busoni, Sorabji, etc.

Look at the treatise by Johan Fux - HE codified harmony. Bach developed and embellished it. Through Bach's children, the Sonata was established. Mozart 'tightened' it up as a real form (exposition, development, recapitulation). Mozart was also one of the main exponents of antecedent and consequent melodic structures.

TBC...

Eddie Cochran wrote "Summertime Blues".

Might be jumping ahead a bit, there...

"Ancient music can only be imagined by scholars, based on findings from a range of paleolithic sites, such as bones in which lateral holes have been pierced: these are usually identified as flutes,[4] blown at one end like the Japanese shakuhachi. Instruments, such as the seven-holed flute and various types of stringed instruments have been recovered from the Indus Valley Civilization archaeological sites.[5] India has one of the oldest musical traditions in the world—references to Indian classical music (marga) can be found in the ancient scriptures of the Hindu tradition, the Vedas.[6] The earliest and largest collection of prehistoric musical instruments was found in China and dates back to between 7000 and 6600 BC.[7]"


..... or back...

I think the title of this Topic is in reference to the Western Tonal Tradition.

quote:

Originally posted by Dan Carney:
I think the title of this Topic is in reference to the Western Tonal Tradition.

Oh.

Yes Beethoven had a rule book. Of course, he would tear pages out and write new ones whenever he felt like it :-)

I think Beethoven could write, and rewrite the book within a sonata

Agreed :-)

We used to discuss music here, but no longer it seems.

To talk of a rule book ... Bach's, Beethoven's [which is Haydn's expanded in length but not scope], Wagner's [which is Liszt's but simplified], and so on is to assume a level of knowledge which is not going to encourage anyone to investigate any new first time classical music, but which allows some people to suggest that they are cleverer than most others on the subject!

Boring elitist crap, which serves no purpose at all.

It is not a starting point and the points made are so simplified, plain wrong, or simplistic as to show the authors of this dross as being only untutored pseudo-musicologist snobs at best and frightful snobs at worst.

I am out of here [the Music Room I mean] as there is nothing but discussion of musical pap in depth and pap discussion of deep music to contend with these days.

The Padded Cell is full is fundamentalist atheists, and the Hifi Corner last mentioned the effect of any alleged improvement in the perception of Music 57 days ago in one of my posts, apart from the mention of PRaT - whatever that might be ...

Happy New Year to those sane enough to see the mad house for what it has become.

Best wishes to the few who can understand this thought.

I'd hazard a guess that this forum brings together wide variety of people who strive for more realistic/musical/engaging sonic reproduction, but the majority of whom could not, beyond a few music lessons as children or strumming a few chords, be called musicians. I include myself in this majority.

Yet I love music, and I love classical music. And while I'm poor at articulating my passions, preferences and appreciation for composers' works, recordings and sonic reproduction and remain ignorant of almost all the compositional techniques which underpin the music I so enjoy, I enjoy communing, even at the superficial level typically found on this and other fora (absorbing/contributing opinions on works, recordings, gear or chit-chat), with other folks who, like me, may have developed their interest in relative isolation.

George, I understand, and in some ways sympathise with your thought, but suspect the motivation for this kind of dross and pap is not elitism or snobbery, but a desire to share an (occasionally clumsy) enthusiasm and ellicit similar enthusiasm from other participants. The music room would be a poorer place without your enlightening essays and obstinate opinions.

But Mike, this thread looks awfully similar to this very recent one. Let's get a little more specific than attempting to discuss a complete history of western classical music in a single thread!

This thread is a passing thought on music recently heard, no more than that. I have posted similar threads in the past, and will do so again in future. The points and topics will vary.

Nathaniel, it is similar in topic but not in content to a previous thread, neither claiming to be comprehensive. So what? I advise you to keep your own council, and not edit mine :-)

George, your views on music are so extreme, and so devoid of enjoyment, I doubt your sanity. Goodbye and good luck. Let's make an effort to stick to your guns and not post here again.

You are unpleasant, a crappy writer and musically quite a bit less than you claim.
What's really stuck in your craw is that others are enjoying a discussion about music you have dismissed, and you expect others to follow you in your assessments.

That is not going to happen. Interest in Chopin and Debussy is not the evil you make it out to be.

Good riddance!

George,
Please don't go. Our musical tastes are quite different but I've always found what you have to say, and the style in which you say it, enjoyable, interesting, and informative. Sadly, recently there's been too much of the "tap tap tap now children listen to my latest pronouncements" style of post and frankly I find it boring, pompous and repetitive. I'll happily post on occasion about the Beatles, Led Zeppelin etc while learning from you about classical musical styles, history, instruments, etc. I do not like being told, for example, that somebody who understands the technical aspects of music more than I do, enjoys it more than I do, and this sort of BS has meant I've visited this forum less than I used to.

Tom.

PS Have a happy new year.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
This thread is a passing thought on music recently heard, no more than that. I have posted similar threads in the past, and will do so again in future. The points and topics will vary.

Nathaniel, it is similar in topic but not in content to a previous thread, neither claiming to be comprehensive. So what? I advise you to keep your own council, and not edit mine :-)

George, your views on music are so extreme, and so devoid of enjoyment, I doubt your sanity. Goodbye and good luck. Let's make an effort to stick to your guns and not post here again.

You are unpleasant, a crappy writer and musically quite a bit less than you claim.
What's really stuck in your craw is that others are enjoying a discussion about music you have dismissed, and you expect others to follow you in your assessments.

That is not going to happen. Interest in Chopin and Debussy is not the evil you make it out to be.

Good riddance!

GFFJ and mikeeschman show their true colours (yet again)

Play nice, guys.

For Christ's sake, if this forum is not the place for commentary on your passing thoughts about the music you are listening to; what is the place?

Passing thoughts about music.

I have learned quite a bit this way, here on the forum, and much of it from George.

But who wants to be insulted for their passing thoughts?

To work, the forum should allow any poster to express themselves, however they see fit. If that post connects with another poster in sympathy with what you had to say, then you have a conversation. Otherwise, your remarks go unanswered. Or you have an argument. I do not enjoy the argument. I'm just looking for opposing, or just plain different, takes on the same music. It's an attempt to learn more from other people about the same music I am listening to. This works more often than not here on the forum.

This forum has reshaped my understanding of music and enriched my library. That is all I want or expect from the forum. Others have different aims. That's OK. Both desires can be expressed and satisfied.

Live and let live. In taste, there can be no dispute. Ideas to live by.

More views on music would be an interesting read.

This is the last I will say of this.

Please delete this thread.

I'm disappointed by this exchange as I enjoy reading the passing thoughts on music of both Mike and George. Surely this forum is big enough for the both of them - and for everyone else who contributes, whatever their level of knowledge.

George - why dismiss threads as "crap" simply because they do not share your approach or musical preferences? I love a wide range of music beyond reason, but I am also interested in the history of music, and (up to a point) its technical analysis. In any case, I do not agree with your assessment that music is no longer discussed in this forum - you need only refer to the long threads about piano playing, or Paul Lewis' Beethoven Sonatas to realise this is not the case. If you feel the level of discussion is too technical for the classical novice (again, I disagree) you could always start a thread (as you have often done in the past) aimed at newcomers. But then you have posted very learned and detailed mini-essays on the historical dvelopment of musical instruments, and the like so I don't understand where you're coming from in your last post. Anyway, I wish you well, whatever you decide to do.

Regards
Nigel

...

Come on guys. I find that George and Mike annoy and inform about equally.
They are two of the most intransigent and at times not understandable posters.
Please keep it up and stop squabbling or there will be no pudding.

"how can you have any pudding if don't stop arguing" paraphrasing.

quote:

Originally posted by BigH47:

"how can you have any pudding if don't stop arguing" paraphrasing.

and I thought it was if you don't eat your meat

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
We used to discuss music here, but no longer it seems.

To talk of a rule book ... Bach's, Beethoven's [which is Haydn's expanded in length but not scope], Wagner's [which is Liszt's but simplified], and so on is to assume a level of knowledge which is not going to encourage anyone to investigate any new first time classical music, but which allows some people to suggest that they are cleverer than most others on the subject!

Boring elitist crap, which serves no purpose at all.

It is not a starting point and the points made are so simplified, plain wrong, or simplistic as to show the authors of this dross as being only untutored pseudo-musicologist snobs at best and frightful snobs at worst.

I am out of here [the Music Room I mean] as there is nothing but discussion of musical pap in depth and pap discussion of deep music to contend with these days.

The Padded Cell is full is fundamentalist atheists, and the Hifi Corner last mentioned the effect of any alleged improvement in the perception of Music 57 days ago in one of my posts, apart from the mention of PRaT - whatever that might be ...

Happy New Year to those sane enough to see the mad house for what it has become.

Best wishes to the few who can understand this thought.

Hi George.

I imagine i may be one of the philistines to whom you refer.

Nonetheless i hope you don't disappear as i for one enjoy your posts and have personally benefited from several (re Bach, so hugely in fact).

Regards, Paul.

I think the root of the current problem George has with me is that I am very interested in Chopin and Debussy at the moment, and these are two composers George has dismissed.

So it goes.

Chopin and Debussy are two composers I have heard for a good while, but never had a particular interest in until now. I find myself posting about anything to do with them that has raised my curiosity, and am lucky to have several posters who have made a study of this music.

So I'm not posting to educate anyone else in any way, but to satisfy my own interests.

I thought that was what we are all doing here.