Classical Music Forum banner

Haydn needs more love

7K views 71 replies 23 participants last post by  Tapkaara 
#1 ·
I find it interesting, considering his overall accepted fame, that little mention is made of Haydn on this forum compared to other composers.

Certainly if one were to write a history of Western art music, Haydn would get a bigger "centerfold" than the oft-discussed-here Mahler, Sibelius, etc. Nothing against the latter, certainly, but I found it interesting that in the past I had to explicitly inquire as to where to start with Haydn, whereas there is a veritable bounty of input on many other composers.

In my time away from the forum, I picked up a selection of Haydn's symphonies and string quartets, and (as silly as this may sound) was actually surprised at its quality. Beautiful, genius even.

Now, like most of you, I wouldn't say he is my favorite composer, but I felt like giving him some props. Feel free to join me in giving him a "thumbs-up"--or even some other finger (possibly in some other direction) if you desire.
 
#2 ·
Unlike many of you he is one of my favorite composers, definitely genius.
Ignoring his importance in the development of music, his work is profoundly beautiful, especially his oratorios (the seasons, creation)
 
#4 · (Edited)
I find his music far more palatable than Mozart's. It is gently humorous and as approachable as the man himself is said to have been. If he is not mentioned often I think it is because he is the benchmark against which Beethoven is measured. Haydn is the boundary that Beethoven pushed against and expanded, and so his music might unjustly be considered normal.

People tend to focus on his symphonies and string quartets, but I have heard some of his piano sonatas on period instruments. That is quite a nice experience.
 
#6 ·
18th century classical composers don't get enough love in general if you ask me. While they never reached the same heights, Mozart owes a lot to the likes of Gluck, Vanhal and Bach's sons while Boccherini offered his own idiosyncratic take on classical music. If anything Haydn gets far more recognition than these people, while the rest are dismissed by a lot of people as wallpaper 'muzak'. Fair enough, music from the classical period might not have been as harmonically complex as romanticism or even the baroque music that preceded it, but sometimes simplicity can be a good thing.
 
#7 ·
In my opinion required listening:
Symphonies 80-88, 94-104, 27, 12-17
String quartets - ALL
Oratorios - Seaons, Creation
Seven Last words
Piano sonatas - 11 and some others
Cello Concerto
Trumpet Concerto
Piano concerto - No 9

Dont forget to give his brother Michael Haydn a try.

And yes 18th century composers dont get enough recognition at all - Clementi, Boccherini, Salieri, Stamitz, Paisiello, Pichl, Cimarosa (beutiful oboe concerto). The entire Mannheim school which was hugely influential in their time (Stamitz, Cannabich).
 
#9 ·
Yes, Michael Haydn needs some love too. As prolific as his brother, but almost completely forgotten. Sometimes I wonder if he would have been more famous if he had had another last name, or if he would have been even more forgotten than he is now.

I agree that brother Joseph, despite his fame, is often relatively overlooked, while Bach, Mozart and Beethoven get so much more attention.

Cannabich and the Stamitzes are nice 18th century acquaintances, as are the Bach sons, I think.
 
#8 ·
And yes 18th century composers dont get enough recognition at all - Clementi, Boccherini, Salieri, Stamitz, Paisiello, Pichl, Cimarosa (beutiful oboe concerto). The entire Mannheim school which was hugely influential in their time (Stamitz, Cannabich).

Yes. I agree that the 18th century composers are somewhat underrated. While Bach might be the towering figure of the Baroque era, there are easily a half-dozen and more other composers of the era that are of the greatest merit and generally recognized (Handel, Vivaldi, Scarlatti, Telemann, Corelli, etc...). One finds a similar situation with the Romantic era. The field is in no way limited to Brahms and Wagner. We have Mahler, Strauss, Schumann, Chopin, Debussy, Mussorgsky, Tchaikovsky, etc... The 18th century, however, seems to be divided between Mozart and Haydn... with Haydn taking the second fiddle position. The reality is that Haydn is a truly towering figure who produced an incredible body of beautiful music. But there are others as well. Michael Haydn, Carl Stamitz, Gluck, Salieri, and a good many more. For whatever reason, it seems as if the Baroque and the Romantic era have there adherents who forever delve into the works of the 2nd tier and 3rd tier composers... while the classical period seems somewhat ignored.
 
#10 ·
I think the classical period (which I see as going beyond 1800) was like a dramatic intellectual composition of music with it's development and conflict of ideas. Then by the mid 19th century and onwards there was a more emotional and atmospheric composition. Then the 20th century was a combination of both these different aspects.
 
#12 ·
Oh yes, the Haydn's definatly need more love (especially from me). In generel, I tend to enjoy most of Mozarts work, so it's rather odd that I havn't started exploring more of Haydn's music. He was a rather intelligent person, something that is noticeable in his music, he included alot of jokes in his music (not only refering to the "surprise" in his 94:th symphony) which is indeed enjoyable if you know a thing or two about composition in general.

After having read this thread, I immediatly listened to Michael Haydn's 20:th symphony (Spotify is a God's gift if one is into classic music) and I must say that I'm rather impressed by what I've heard so far.
 
#13 ·
Haydn is one of the most important composers of all time, but I think he's recognized as such. One might argue that he's less popular than Mozart or Beethoven, but who isn't? I agree though that the contemporaries of Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven deserve more attention than they are getting. I don't know why they don't. Maybe their music isn't quite up to the standard of the best music of the holy trinity of the classical era, but it's definitely worth checking out. I have recordings of most of the classical composers mentionned here and from some others besides them and I enjoy them very much. There's lots of recordings out there for those interested in music from this era.
 
#15 ·
The Godfather of the Symphony. He is awesome in basically every category. Haydn wrote a large variety of pieces, directed effected the future of music (teaching Mozart, etc.), championed a form of music into popularity (the symphony of course), wrote some wonderful music, experimented with different effects you can get from music (thus he really kick started the classical period), and brought some humor to music.
 
#16 ·
everything that isnt romantic orchestral music needs more love...... the bias you see online (not just this forum) towards romantic orchestral music is staggering

That is true. Romanticism was a marvelous period and produced some absolutely towering figures, but I agree that with the exception of the absolute giants (Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Stravinsky...) almost anything outside of the Romantic period gets short-changed. It is not uncommon to find the music lover who champions Bruckner, Strauss, Mahler, Vaughan-Williams... even Bax, or Delius. However it almost seems that only the baroque fanatic spends much time with Handel, Telemann, or Scarlatti and only a medievalist would even think to listen to Des Prez, Hildegard of Bingen, or some such music.
 
#22 ·
That is true. Romanticism was a marvelous period and produced some absolutely towering figures, but I agree that with the exception of the absolute giants (Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Stravinsky...) almost anything outside of the Romantic period gets short-changed. It is not uncommon to find the music lover who champions Bruckner, Strauss, Mahler, Vaughan-Williams... even Bax, or Delius. However it almost seems that only the baroque fanatic spends much time with Handel, Telemann, or Scarlatti and only a medievalist would even think to listen to Des Prez, Hildegard of Bingen, or some such music.
The romantic era may be the most popular era, but I think that the interest in for example baroque music has been on the rise in recent decades. There was a time when only the works of Bach and a few things like the "Messiah" from Handel were regularly recorded. Now we have plenty of recordings from all the important baroque composers, from Monteverdi to the French baroque composers to multiple recordings of most of Handel's oratorios and operas, and so on - something that was nearly unthinkable 20 or 25 years ago.

Same with the classical era. There has always been lots of Mozart available, virtually everything from Beethoven, some Haydn and one or two Gluck operas, and that was basically it. Now there are many recordings of all the recognizable names of this era available. That in itself doesn't prove an increase in popularity of non-romantic music, but it certainly suggests it. If nobody was listening to all that stuff they wouldn't release it.
 
#17 ·
everything that isnt romantic orchestral music needs more love...... the bias you see online (not just this forum) towards romantic orchestral music is staggering
Woah there! Try not to put me in the category of biased music listeners (although I'm not saying you did). I don't think you're giving us enough credit...
 
#18 ·
everything that isnt romantic orchestral music needs more love...... the bias you see online (not just this forum) towards romantic orchestral music is staggering...

As I think about it, I'm struck with the fact that the situation is not too different in the visual arts. Impressionism, Post-Impressionism, and late 19th century academic painting (the Victorian painters and masters of the French Academy) virtually dominate the discussions of art and the choices of art favorites. Modernism is often seen as too thorny and Post-Modernism remains largely unfamiliar while older painters of the Baroque and Renaissance are imagined by many as being too far removed.
 
#20 ·
The Renaissance period had some magnificent paintings.

"Some"? It was virtually unrivaled. Still outside of the major figures commonly known (Michelangelo, Leonardo, perhaps Raphael, and just maybe Titian or Durer) you'd be surprised just how little artists such as Giotto, Fra Angelico, Bellini, Cimabue, Tintoretto, Veronese, Botticelli, Van Eyck, Van der Weyden, Breughel, Bosch, etc... pop up in discussion (let alone are sited as influences) by artists or art lovers. Monet, Van Gogh, Degas, Manet are certainly brilliant artists, but their work in no way dwarfs that of the Renaissance masters. Yet I would venture to guess that there are more painters and art lovers today who admire the pre-Raphaelites than the artists (such as Fra Angelioco, Fra Philipo Lippi, Mantegna, and Massaccio after whom they were named. I would also venture to gues that there are more artists/art lovers who appreciate the work of the arch-academic, William Bouguereau than those who appreciate Giotto, Cimabue, the Lorenzetti Brothers, Giorgione, or any number of other far greater artists of the Renaissance.
 
#21 ·
???? what did I do wrong? I just said the Renaissance period was great. You punish rather harshly, sir :( But yes, I totally agree with you. There was a great amount of different perspectives going into painting during that time period.
 
#23 ·
???? what did I do wrong? I just said the Renaissance period was great. You punish rather harshly, sir But yes, I totally agree with you. There was a great amount of different perspectives going into painting during that time period.

You take me wrong. I am simply suggesting that you understate the facts by suggesting that there are "some" great Renaissance painters and I sought to point out just how this era... for all its merits... is underrated by many in favor of the more contemporary art that they imagine as not being so far removed from their experience.:)
 
#24 ·
The romantic era may be the most popular era, but I think that the interest in for example baroque music has been on the rise in recent decades. There was a time when only the works of Bach and a few things like the "Messiah" from Handel were regularly recorded. Now we have plenty of recordings from all the important baroque composers, from Monteverdi to the French baroque composers to multiple recordings of most of Handel's oratorios and operas, and so on - something that was nearly unthinkable 20 or 25 years ago.

Same with the classical era. There has always been lots of Mozart available, virtually everything from Beethoven, some Haydn and one or two Gluck operas, and that was basically it. Now there are many recordings of all the recognizable names of this era available. That in itself doesn't prove an increase in popularity of non-romantic music, but it certainly suggests it. If nobody was listening to all that stuff they wouldn't release it.

I quite agree... especially with regard to the increased access to Baroque composers. I remember Handel being almost limited to the Messiah, the Royal Fireworks, and the Water Music, and his operas being largely ignored. Now, thankfully, there is far more access to a broad array of his works, as well as those of Corelli, Scarlatti, Rameau, Victoria... to say nothing of Vivaldi and the recent recordings of the vast cache of his works that have been known for decades but until recently left unrecorded. Indeed, I would suggest that the access to classical music has never been so great. I remember when I first started collecting that it was virtually impossible to find a recording of Schubert's lieder... forget Schumann, Wolf or the French songs of Hahn, Faure, Debussy, etc... Nevertheless... it seems that the classical era has been the slowest in benefiting from the new access.
 
#25 ·
I've said this before & it's probably obvious to many of you, but I think Haydn was the master of contrast. Just listen to, for example, the first movement of Symphony No. 101 'The Clock.' It starts off quite seriously with a rather melancholy, vague theme, then WOOSH! in comes this very decisively upbeat theme, he floods the whole movement with light & energy. If we are talking of visual artists of the time, his music reminds me of the paintings of Canaletto - the marked contrasts in light, tone and texture - water, sky and land, natural and man-made things.

I also like Haydn's Symphony No. 49 'La Passione,' it's depth of drama and expressivness rivals even Beethoven's efforts. So I strongly disagree with anyone who says Haydn is a lightweight compared to his great student Beethoven...
 
#27 ·
I think it's great if we take a holistic view of all the arts, not only music, but also literature and visual art as well. I'm not a big reader, but I enjoy a good book; & I really like the visual arts, I have some art books as well, I love going to art galleries. I think having diverse artistic interests just deepens your appreciation of art, whatever container it comes in. It makes you more perceptive & allows you to make the connections. I think that's great...
 
#31 ·
And yet contemporary classical music (let's say music of the last 50 years or so) is the least listened to of the lot perhaps.

That's to be expected... at least since the evolution of Modernism and the esoteric notions of the avant garde... the increasing hermeticism of art and the rejection of any attempt to engage the audience (perish the thought!). The same can certainly be found to be true in the visual arts. How many leading contemporary painters can you name? How many under the age of 50? How many critically acclaimed contemporary poets do you know?
 
#32 ·
I like modern poetry of the last 50 years or so quite alot. I may like less poetry from the 80s to 2000s than from the 50s to the 70s though but maybe there can be more of a creative output in some periods than others.

The point about modern classical music isn't that it doesn't appeal to most of the public, most listen to popular music that is the mainstream culture now. The main point is that those who listen to classical music don't listen much - generally - to stuff past 1950. This wasn't always the case with new music and I suppose there have been innovations before but people have listened. I think there has been some creativity in the last 50 years, for example in the 70s and 80s as well as other periods. Modern music should actually have more of a connection to people than older music as it's from their time.
 
#34 ·
I think that nefigah's main point is that Haydn seems to be under-rated on this Forum, not in general (see his first post). I am not sure that I agree. I did a quick search on Haydn using the "search facility" and quite a few threads came up that belie the suggestion that Haydn is not loved.

That Haydn is not under-rated generally seems obvious to me. He generally comes up well inside the top 10 on most polls that I have ever seen. For example in Phil Goulding's list he was placed at No 5. In T-C's recent poll on Top 20 Favourite Composers Haydn was also very highly placed indeed, around No 5 or 6. This is an incredibly high rank given the standard of competition.

Hence I don't think that Haydn needs any more love than he already gets. I should add that I have more material by Haydn than any other composer, and like him a great deal, but I still prefer Mozart who in my book had an extra something, call it stardust or something.
 
#70 ·
Hence I don't think that Haydn needs any more love than he already gets. I should add that I have more material by Haydn than any other composer, and like him a great deal, but I still prefer Mozart who in my book had an extra something, call it stardust or something.
No stardust? No love! :)

Tough luck, "Joey Amiable"! (Haydn needs a mob name...)

"Stardust" is a good name for what's missing, though.
 
#38 ·
Maybe it would be better if people just listened to music as music instead of worrying what period it was written in as well or what style it is supposed to be in. Good material in a structured form with consistent invention is good in any kind of music.
Yes it would be better but its never going to happen. Most people are very prejudiced toward older styles like classical, jazz and blues, and seem content in listening to their favourite new style and wouldn't even think of putting the effort in to expand their musical horizons.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top