Thread: Your Vote: Mozart vs. Beethoven

Originally Posted by Mephistopheles

Hahaha! Dear, sweet Partita, I am sure that my colleagues here on Talk Classical will read this poor mathematical exposition and come swiftly to the conclusion that you have failed to look at my highly convincing graph quite closely enough.

I actually think some people who liked it also didn't notice the joke. But, overall, nice one, I chuckled when I saw it.

Originally Posted by Mephistopheles

In order to help everyone understand the importance of the data, I have created a chart with a highly sophisticated scaling system which visualises the true extent to which Beethoven is in the lead.
...
Further examination will demonstrate that Beethoven's bar is currently more than 1500% taller than Mozart's.

This was good.

Reminds me of that old (Soviet) Russian joke we also had in Poland about Khrushchev and Kennedy competing for 100 meters. The next day Pravda reported: "Two great world leaders challenged each other to a race; Comrade Khrushchev finished a strong second, Kennedy was next to last"...

Originally Posted by Carpenoctem

I actually think some people who liked it also didn't notice the joke. But, overall, nice one, I chuckled when I saw it.

The joke? Go on then enlighten us.

I love them both, but chose M (his opera and PC being the deciders). Not to mention that I'm a terrible sucker for gorgeous tonal aesthetics - which, in my opinion, puts M quite a bit ahead of the lot. I'm not a big fan of symphony nor sonatas in general, but had I been, I may have been much more swayed by B.

Also, in regard to the level of "fluff" or "crap" that the composers produced... The only reason we know that M produced a sizeable number here is because his widow proved to be a shrewd business woman and saved so much of his work. You can almost envision the scene of Constanze and her second husband rummaging through the old works when money got a little tight: "How about we release this little number he sneezed out in 10 minutes when that little baron in Prussia requested a last minute dance?" Not to be totally dismissive of her either...she did much to cement his M's legacy as a genius. Beethoven may have been smarter in discarding more of his fluff, or refusing to complete it.

Oh, and as for K545 being easy...nothing easy about it! As an amateur pianist, I can fake my way pretty well through many difficult Romantic piano sonatas, but I can't fake my way through the K545 -- requires too much focus and precision, I think, which is typical of a Mozart work. And, in regard to the predictability of music...I probably find Mozart music more predictable as an entire body of work as he did reuse themes and ideas in many of his pieces. But, I find each individual piece of music (trying to listen to it from the angle of a person who has not heard any of M's other pieces) quite unpredictable and full of surprise.

Originally Posted by Partita

I would have thought that 55.8% is within the range of pure chance, given the total number of votes cast so far (105), assuming that the two composers are liked equally by a very much larger community of fans.

Figures can only be shown based on who voted,do you suggest it should be ignored?
Having said that it is all highly painful,the important thing is to take in what has been said by people who seem to have some knowledge.
Of course it's not chance ,it represents the votes cast.

Originally Posted by IBMchicago

Oh, and as for K545 being easy...nothing easy about it! As an amateur pianist, I can fake my way pretty well through many difficult Romantic piano sonatas, but I can't fake my way through the K545 -- requires too much focus and precision, I think, which is typical of a Mozart work. And, in regard to the predictability of music...I probably find Mozart music more predictable as an entire body of work as he did reuse themes and ideas in many of his pieces. But, I find each individual piece of music (trying to listen to it from the angle of a person who has not heard any of M's other pieces) quite unpredictable and full of surprise.

Good post.
Glad you say that about K545. Yes I know it is within the reach of people with modest gifts. But to bring out the full beauty of it requires incredibly precise technique - sense of rythm, crisp touch and overall meticulous attention to detail.
I think if you know Mozart's music well - have heard a wide range of it (say at least 100 pieces) - you will drop that predictability nonsense.

Originally Posted by stomanek

Good post.
Glad you say that about K545. Yes I know it is within the reach of people with modest gifts. But to bring out the full beauty of it requires incredibly precise technique - sense of rythm, crisp touch and overall meticulous attention to detail.
I think if you know Mozart's music well - have heard a wide range of it (say at least 100 pieces) - you will drop that predictability nonsense.

Or you might lose interest after 3 pieces. lol

I was listening to Bernstein's recordings of Haydn symphonies from the 60s. Haydn was almost as good as Mozart. I love the classical period, because it's the point where music goes from being simple "divertimenti" or serious "religious music" to becoming fully realized abstract music. Bach suggested it, and Beethoven took it a lot further. But Haydn and Mozart really did the work to lay the foundation.

Originally Posted by bigshot

I was listening to Bernstein's recordings of Haydn symphonies from the 60s. Haydn was almost as good as Mozart. I love the classical period, because it's the point where music goes from being simple "divertimenti" or serious "religious music" to becoming fully realized abstract music. Bach suggested it, and Beethoven took it a lot further. But Haydn and Mozart really did the work to lay the foundation.

Or could say music had to change. It can't always be the same stuff no matter how great it is.

Originally Posted by moody

Figures can only be shown based on who voted,do you suggest it should be ignored?
Having said that it is all highly painful,the important thing is to take in what has been said by people who seem to have some knowledge.
Of course it's not chance ,it represents the votes cast.

Jeeeeezzzz.

You're making waaaaaayyyyyyy too much of 108 votes cast (at this point) which, if just 5 had been cast the other way - we would be looking at an exact tie!

Why do I have the strong feeling that Mozart (should he be here today) would be waaaaayyyyyy more impressed with his dominance in a universal way as reflected in the Amazon and Google "hits" relating to his name. And forget the Britanny Spears crap. We are talking "within the classical music genre" here.

Stay focused.

Originally Posted by poconoron

Jeeeeezzzz.

You're making waaaaaayyyyyyy too much of 108 votes cast (at this point) which, if just 5 had been cast the other way - we would be looking at an exact tie!

Why do I have the strong feeling that Mozart (should he be here today) would be waaaaayyyyyy more impressed with his dominance in a universal way as reflected in the Amazon and Google "hits" relating to his name. And forget the Britanny Spears crap. We are talking "within the classical music genre" here.

Stay focused.

Would've. Could've. The fact is Beethoven won.

Originally Posted by poconoron

Jeeeeezzzz.

You're making waaaaaayyyyyyy too much of 108 votes cast (at this point) which, if just 5 had been cast the other way - we would be looking at an exact tie!

Why do I have the strong feeling that Mozart (should he be here today) would be waaaaayyyyyy more impressed with his dominance in a universal way as reflected in the Amazon and Google "hits" relating to his name. And forget the Britanny Spears crap. We are talking "within the classical music genre" here.

Stay focused.

Yes,but we can only talk about what we have going on here,that's the purpose of a forum. The Pro-Mozart people throughout the world have not voted on TC.Based on your premise we should not have polls---which might be a good thing!
As for Miss Spears,that has nothing to do with me thank the Lord.
As for your last comment,you've seldom met anyone more focussed than me.

Originally Posted by moody

Figures can only be shown based on who voted,do you suggest it should be ignored?
Having said that it is all highly painful,the important thing is to take in what has been said by people who seem to have some knowledge.
Of course it's not chance ,it represents the votes cast.

Among the people who have voted in this specific poll there is no doubt that Beethoven has so far achieved a higher number of votes than Mozart, currently 59/49 respectively. I wasn’t suggesting that any of these individual votes is invalid or should be ignored.

My point was that this result isn't large enough in favor of Beethoven to reject the hypothesis that Mozart and Beethoven would score equally in a very much larger survey of classical music fans.

It’s like asking how many times a coin has to be flipped to determine whether it’s biased in favor of one side or another. If a coin was flipped 108 times (the current total of votes in this poll) and it achieved 59 “heads” and 49 “tails”, this wouldn’t be sufficient to assert confidently that it’s actually biased, as this result could have resulted from chance factors using an unbiased coin.

The victory goes to the noble, heroic warrior of Romanticism~

Since the thread asked a qualitative question ("Who do you most prefer") not a quantitative one ("Who is the most popular") a statistical approach to the "results" seems to me redundant.

That includes the notion of "winning" or "losing" - BD, I'm talking to you!