It's never done anything for me either tbh

 

A sarcastic jape, no doubt, aimed at the 4'33" thread and opinions within it that differ from the OP's.
Basically one big straw man fallacy.
Moving along....

 

So you think Beethoven's 9th is a joke?

I made this thread because I have similar feelings to what is described in the 4'33 thread

 

I do find it a bit wrong that people are quick to rush to 4'33 to spill their seed, yet this thread would get the opposite reaction. I don't dislike Beethoven but I've never found his symphonies that impressive in the symphonic genre. Maybe I'm just a snowflake but not everyone worships it right?

 

It must have lots of merit, given that many people consider it the greatest piece of music ever composed. Personally, I dislike it.

 

What is so good about it?

Well for a start, it's got a movement in D minor, another in D minor, a movement in Bflat major and a movement in D major. I love D, especially minor!

 

Well, it was the first symphony to include a choral movement. Surely in that regard it has artistic merit.

 

I subscribe to Vaughan Williams' view of the 9th. He didn't like it (though he disliked Beethoven's music in general, which I certainly don't) but he considered it a great work of art. He even wrote an extended essay explaining why that was, though that's something else I'd have to leave to him.

 

:tiphat:STI:tiphat:

 

A movement in D minor, another in D minor, a movement in Bflat major and a movement in D major.

Why are you listing the keys of the movements, Harrison? Can you explain how this figures into your thinking?

 

I've talked about this at length with others and I'll give you one of my favorite answers from a pianist I talked with concerning the 9th. It's very long but comprehensive, brace yourselves:

"Like a great, expansive painting in which every brush stroke is just so and all of them combine to make a picture that transports the viewer from the here and now to a space of aesthetic joy, every note in Beethoven's 9th Symphony is perfect and all of them combine to make one of the most magnificent musical compositions ever conceived by the mind of a human being. The panorama experienced in just over an hour in this work is vast.

Imagine attending a performance never having heard it before. There on stage is a large symphony orchestra, four vocal soloists, and a massive chorus. Imagine your expectations seeing this assembly of sheer musical potential. Imagine your surprise when the conductor raises a baton to bring forth the simplest, quietest, open fifth (A-E) in tremolo strings in the middle of the orchestra's tonal register. The open fifth is utterly static. Harmonically, it doesn't "want" to go anywhere. It is a state of being in very simple form. One might think, "In the beginning…" The harmony still goes nowhere, but the rhythm starts to emerge with downward E-A strokes, which in turn become more complexly expressed, while the entirety of what you're hearing grows unrelentingly loader and therefore closer. And as it approaches, the harmony finally shifts from the A-E open fifth to the D-A open fifth, for the first time establishing the tonic foundation (D) and bursting out with such force that you think, now, "Let there be light!" Or at least, let there be energy!

The movement is highly energetic and turbulent, pushing you forcibly along to its end. In the second movement you would normally expect a slow relaxing contrast to the highly energized first movement, but what you get instead is a loud, romping scherzo. Only then do you get your slow movement, by the end of which, you have been engulfed in glorious music -- but what of those four soloists and that entire choir still standing there looking at you. You have not heard a peep from any of them and you have enjoyed about three-quarters of an hour of groundbreaking music… significantly longer than most other symphonies of the era.

The fourth movement opens with urgently to launch a finale that, after getting you full attention, combines some reminiscences from prior movements with a hint of the main theme to come. It is a lengthy introduction with some fits and starts, more looking back at past material alternating with ever clearer predictions of the main theme to come, and then, the first human voice heard in the symphony, the clarion call from the baritone solo, "Oh Fruende," .. "Oh, joy!!" and soon the entire chorus is involved with the soloists and the orchestra singing Schiller's Ode to Joy. What had already been big, quickly becomes vast.

Why is it beautiful?

Humans are naturally tuned in to beauty. It is not unusual to watch a sunset and be moved. To know that millions of others like us are moved even by this very sunset or by other sunsets all around the world everyday. The color and grandeur arrest us. But even in the great variety of sunsets we see, the structure of a sunset remains constant and that grounds us as humans able to understand what we are seeing and able to understand that it is immense and outside of us, but we can still take it into ourselves and be moved by it.

When we consider music, there is a new dimension to the experience. Unlike a sunset, music is made by humans and we relate to it on many levels. Sweet melodies make us want to sing. Strong rhythmic patterns with regular and repeating motifs make us want to dance. Even without the suggestion of a dance, strong rhythms at least tempt us to tap or stomp our feet. In tribal dances when the members of the tribe join in, it is a coming together of individuals but the expression of a group awareness, a celebration of many individuals joined in a common expression of their togetherness. It is generally experienced as a happy thing to do. A "beautiful" experience.

In classical music we experience some of the same elements.. melodies that make us want to sing, rhythms that make us want to move, even dance, sad passages that seem to be able to express our own sadness. And all of this assembled in structures and progressions that make sense inherently, and that help us know comfortably our place in the unraveling musical narrative. And we appreciate the balance and continuity in these musical structures. And at then end, if it was beautiful, we have the sense of having been lifted out of the everyday world and taken by other human beings (the composer, the performers) to another pleasurable state of being. That's beautiful.

But What of Beethoven's 9th in particular?

Here again is the achievement of a other humans that speak powerfully to us as humans. Here is the musical equivalent of a cathedral. It's structure is large, but balanced. It can be seen from many perspectives from far away to close from the outside, to panoramic (gazing up at the dome) to detailed and allegorical up close on the inside. A cathedral can be experienced as the story of creation to the triumph of man.

This musical parallel that we are considering does all those things. It can comfortably express to the listener the void at the beginning of creation, creation itself, struggles and contemplations as humans develop, and triumph at the finale. And it is on this same vast scale as a cathedral. We individuals are so small in its presence, and yet we swell with pride that a single human being made it and a relatively small group of human beings can bring it to life in performance.

And in the end, having traversed this most massive and detailed canvas, can you imagine a single note (a single brush stroke) that could be changed to make the whole better? No? Then you have experienced perfection. How could that not be beautiful?"

And then he dropped the mic...

 

You sound awfully sentimental but you never said anything about the music itself

 

Cultural norms that have built up over several centuries (and set in motion long, long before Beethoven was born) have conferred major artistic merit upon it.
You might be out of alignment with those cultural norms. No big deal.

 

I love the "Ode to Joy" section, but I used to not be thrilled with the final movement as a whole, especially the solo vocal parts. Repetition and exposure to different interpretations have helped me to enjoy the symphony better.

If you struggle to enjoy the 4th movement, one of the best I've found has been Solti with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. The best overall version I've heard so far is Karajan with the Berlin Philharmonic.

 

This post reminds me of the guy who looked up at the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and saw only paint.

 

That may make an interesting thread in community forum, it's definitely art but it looks quite ugly

 

Well, the first movement is rough hewn out of granite, and stands monumentally, chisel marks and all. The second galumphs engagingly. The third simply soars. The finale goes all over the place, but given that nobody ever tried anything like it before, it works -- like so many of Beethoven''s other experiments. Also the main theme is one of the great constructs of all time.

Is it the greatest symphony ever written? Probably not. Does it affect many people as if it were? Yup. Would the world be a poorer place without it? Undoubtedly.

 

Anybody has the right to express on TC that he feels that Beethoven's Ninth Symphony is the "greatest symphony ever composed".

Personally I believe Beethoven's Third, Fifth and Sixth are all finer symphonies.

Who cares what anyone else thinks?

I won't get upset about it and I surely won't change my mind based on somebody else's opiñion.

 

The Beethoven 9th is IMO the greatest symphony alongside Mahler's 9th and Bruckner's 8th.

If you simply don't like it, I can respect that.

However, too often people delve into rationalizations for why a piece is overrated, and I do not respect that. You are trying to talk people out of liking something that you don't like. It also smacks of snobbery.

Great art is often great despite such rationalizations. You don't have to explain it other than recognize there is something that draws people to it emotionally.

 

I'm facing the 9th three times this upcoming season with three different groups. I'll play the contrabassoon part. Is it a great symphony? Yes, undeniably. Is it Beethoven's greatest? Not to me; the 3rd is. The 9ths problem is that too many people try to make it into something it isn't. If they would just play it as an original, exciting symphonic work - using Beethoven's tempos! - it just works fine. I do believe that it needs some retouching which is a sacrilege to many purists. But there are some scoring problems that Beethoven no doubt would have corrected if he could have heard it. There are some parts in the finale that are frankly unplayable (see the sextuplets in the bass and contra parts). Some of the vocal quartet writing is awful, but not much can be done about it.

 

I am newer to this forum.

My first response, from your question, is that there is no real question here, in the sense of wanting information or an answer. Taking it at face value, let me ask you, what answer would you accept for the question, "what is so good about it?" What answer would change your mind, or at the least have you respect a difference of opinion about it.

Or take a different strategy. What pieces do you consider objectively good, and what are their qualities that make them good, and let us see whether or not B's 9th shares any of those qualities, or if not, which qualities it lacks.

Without that, an intelligent conversation about this is impossible, and answering you would be more like an attempt at ironic comedy than anything serious.

 

Without that, an intelligent conversation about this is impossible, and answering you would be more like an attempt at ironic comedy than anything serious.

Hmm, why do you say 'ironic comedy'? Seems you are suggesting that it is illogically absurd or something to dislike Beethoven's 9th :lol:
Whilst I like the first two movements, it barely comes close to the 6th or 7th symphonies. I wouldn't quite put them in my "greatest symphonies" lists either, does this make me a sarcastic liar?

 

There are many reasons Beethoven's 9th is such a monumental masterpiece in the history of art. Perhaps most essential to understanding why and how would be an in depth view and recognition of its astounding and elaborate integration of "cyclic form", of which Beethoven is perhaps music history's most miraculous architect. To actually and thoroughly recognize the full panorama and scope of its integration may take dozens of listens, or may infact be unattainable no matter the number, for I can tell you that its depths seem impossibly endless even after hundreds. I don't have several hours (days?) to spend in an attempt to try and break this all down for you here, theme by theme, part by part, but I will say this: the very final climax of the last movement is a musical integration of all 4 movements at once in one final dance and climactic swoop in both instrument and voice. The opening of the symphony and its ensuing development, echoes and alludes to what follows indirectly and directly. Everything in between is deftly integrated in relation to what came before, alludes to what follows and assimilates each of the other movements in its own themes/melodies to varying turns and degrees, directly and indirectly, echoes and allusions. Even aside from this extraordinary achievement of compositional depth and dexterity, the sheer degree of impact and expressiveness and emotional scope of the work is unprecedented and visionary. It is very impressive when a composer manages to integrate cyclic form throughout the whole of a work into an impressive architecture among movements that share pretty similar orchestral colors (think Brahms, Franck, Dvorak). But to accomplish such an extraordinary feat of integration within so much orchestral contrast, varying color and emotion will seem just about impossible until it reveals itself to one in the 9th. When you combine its sheer power, expressiveness and impact with a thorough, detailed assimilation of its infinity of cyclic form, the continual rippling effect throughout and impact of the experience is so overwhelming, flabbergasting and awe-inspiring that I would not hesitate to say it is utterly life changing and would probably completely revolutionize your concept of what a work of art is capable of.

 

Hmmm. The finale's review and rejection of earlier themes before settling on the Ode to Joy is a clever conceit by which to smooth what was at the time of the premiere a shocking transition from instrumental to choral music. This transition, which was the work's most salient feature to contemporary listeners, is why the critic Eduard Hanslick described the work as a statue in white marble with a green marble head. In any case, it is far from the most subtle of Beethoven's essays in cyclic structure. The Appassionata, the Firth Symphony, and the Sonata op. 110 - I am likely forgetting others - are all more convincingly and thoroughly unified.

 

At the end of the day, whether everyone's justifications for their posts are entirely logical or just born of pure hate, I think it's safe to say that people who consider John Cage to be one of the greatest composers out there.... are simply not welcome on TalkClassical.

 

I wonder why some people feel they have to "defend" composers. After all most of the composers involved are long dead, be they Cage or Beethoven. What these people are really defending are their own tastes, nothing else; John Cage certainly doesn't care! And for that matter, why bother to defend your own tastes? Do they really matter to anybody but yourself?

Just don't dis Ludwig, that's all.

 

Merit of the 9th? Just listen to the first movement's thunder. Here we have one of the finest examples of where everything is at the service of the emotional impact including form. Still one of the most uncompromising works ever. The music scene was never the same since. Liking it is a matter of taste, but there is no denying the originality and breadth of the writing and the arrangements.

 

Ode To Joy is comedy music to my ears, but not in a good way

 

Comic in a good way or bad way often depends on whether or not one has understood the comedy, and that in turn depends on understanding and having the text in mind while listening. The tune is essentially a drinking song, commonplace and universal, the words are in a high literary tone. The contrast is important and intentional. The integration of high and low culture this implies goes perfectly with the overall point of the movement. You just aren't getting into the spirit of it! Imagine yourself drunk and flushed with joy, lifting a glass with a crowd of equally enthusiastic strangers and adding your voice to the song. Or you could stand in the doorway and watch the proceedings with a sneer - and go home sober and feeling empty and full of regret. Come on, drink with us! Sing with us! You know you want to!

 

Fine I'll weigh in on it:

1st movement - Really dramatic and forceful, development section is especially impressive
2nd movement - Really groovy, disjointed and fun, a sense of darkness there but with a dance rhythm?
3rd movement - Out of place, just dull and uninteresting for an adagio to me. Feels like the kind of music you hear in fragrance commercials and so forth
4th movement - Charlie Chaplin, Cringe montages and forced unfunny comedy, which is a shame because the first two minutes of this movement are gold!

The first half is great but I fail to enjoy it beyond that :tiphat:

(now I'm going to hell)

 

As with the other Beethoven symphonies, it's in the big bow-wow strain, which isn't really me, but I can't help but be moved at the time of listening. The mixture of song and music means that it's not my favourite - I'm trite enough to love the Fifth most. Sorry!

The Big Three - Bach, Mozart, Beethoven - are 'liked' in that order by me, and yet I have to say that Beethoven often stirs me most. I can't think his stature, or his achievement, with the Ninth or anything else, are in any doubt. It's just a matter of taste.