The Difference Between Mozart and Beethoven

[*skriptis]

https://youtube.com/shorts/G3hFwoGT7zo?si=Yq_8ALsIMHEAOceq



That's why he's the goat.

[Sawfish]

Post by *skriptis
https://youtube.com/shorts/G3hFwoGT7zo?si=Yq_8ALsIMHEAOceq
That's why he's the goat.

Not sure that I can agree with his generalities. I think it was a useful
comparison--and for sure the two guys were quite different, but me, I'd
say that Mozart, in his best piano pieces, writes to a situation or
theme and in doing so gets at profound and subtle emotional mixes, and
Beethoven is more of a purist in that he writes the piece to exercise an
emotion or emotions serially, rather than in concurrent blends of emotions.

Overall I prefer Beethoven for piano works, but Mozart's Piano Concerto
21, 2nd movement, is my personal favorite. Probably have listened to it
maybe 50 times. Even own a transcription for violin.

[*skriptis]

Post by *skriptis
https://youtube.com/shorts/G3hFwoGT7zo?si=Yq_8ALsIMHEAOceq
That's why he's the goat.
Not sure that I can agree with his generalities. I
think it was a useful comparison--and for sure the two guys were
quite different, but me, I'd say that Mozart, in his best piano
pieces, writes to a situation or theme and in doing so gets at
profound and subtle emotional mixes, and Beethoven is more of a
purist in that he writes the piece to exercise an emotion or
emotions serially, rather than in concurrent blends of emotions.
Overall I prefer Beethoven for piano works, but
Mozart's Piano Concerto 21, 2nd movement, is my personal
favorite. Probably have listened to it maybe 50 times. Even own
a transcription for violin.

So who is the goat? ;)

[Sawfish]

Post by *skriptis

Post by *skriptis
https://youtube.com/shorts/G3hFwoGT7zo?si=Yq_8ALsIMHEAOceq
That's why he's the goat.
Not sure that I can agree with his generalities. I
think it was a useful comparison--and for sure the two guys were
quite different, but me, I'd say that Mozart, in his best piano
pieces, writes to a situation or theme and in doing so gets at
profound and subtle emotional mixes, and Beethoven is more of a
purist in that he writes the piece to exercise an emotion or
emotions serially, rather than in concurrent blends of emotions.
Overall I prefer Beethoven for piano works, but
Mozart's Piano Concerto 21, 2nd movement, is my personal
favorite. Probably have listened to it maybe 50 times. Even own
a transcription for violin.

So who is the goat? ;)

Beethoven.

[Sawfish]

Post by Sawfish

Post by *skriptis

Post by *skriptis
https://youtube.com/shorts/G3hFwoGT7zo?si=Yq_8ALsIMHEAOceq
That's why he's the goat.
Not sure that I can agree with his generalities. I
think it was a useful comparison--and for sure the two guys were
quite different, but me, I'd say that Mozart, in his best piano
pieces, writes to a situation or theme and in doing so gets at
profound and subtle emotional mixes, and Beethoven is more of a
purist in that he writes the piece to exercise an emotion or
emotions serially, rather than in concurrent blends of emotions.
Overall I prefer Beethoven for piano works, but
Mozart's Piano Concerto 21, 2nd movement, is my personal
favorite. Probably have listened to it maybe 50 times. Even own
a transcription for violin.

So who is the goat? ;)

Beethoven.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"To the average American or Englishman the very name of anarchy causes a shudder, because it invariably conjures up a picture of a land terrorized by low-browed assassins with matted beards, carrying bombs in one hand and mugs of beer in the other. But as a matter of fact, there is no reason whatever to believe that, if all laws were abolished tomorrow, such swine would survive the day."
--H. L. Mencken
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[*skriptis]

Post by Sawfish
Beethoven.

Let's ask AI.



1. Mozart - 5.77 hours per year
(202 hours in 35 years)

2. Haydn - 4.42 hours per year
(340 hours in 77 years)

3. Bach - 2.69 hours per year
(165 hours in 65 years)

4. Beethoven - 2.41 hours per year
(135 hours in 56 years)





To put Beethoven above Mozart, that's like putting Borg over Nadal on clay imo.


Beethoven has lesser output both in absolute (135 vs 202 hours) and in relative terms (2.41 vs 5.77 hours per year) so to "make them comparable" you'd have to argue Beethoven is from 150% to even 240% of Mozart in sheer quality.

So to make them merely "even" you'd have to argue Beethoven's works are are *twice as good* compared to Mozart's, and that would have to be *on average*.


You'd have to argue each of Borg's FO win is as impressive as 2 Nadal's.



That's the most ludicrous suggestion one could ever make since no one comes even remotely close to Mozart (Nadal on clay) let alone that someone would be "twice as good".



Now let's argue. ;)




But before that, listen all three movements not just your beloved second...

[Sawfish]

Post by *skriptis

Post by Sawfish
Beethoven.

Let's ask AI.
1. Mozart - 5.77 hours per year
(202 hours in 35 years)
2. Haydn - 4.42 hours per year
(340 hours in 77 years)
3. Bach - 2.69 hours per year
(165 hours in 65 years)
4. Beethoven - 2.41 hours per year
(135 hours in 56 years)
To put Beethoven above Mozart, that's like putting Borg over Nadal on clay imo.
Beethoven has lesser output both in absolute (135 vs 202 hours) and in relative terms (2.41 vs 5.77 hours per year) so to "make them comparable" you'd have to argue Beethoven is from 150% to even 240% of Mozart in sheer quality.
So to make them merely "even" you'd have to argue Beethoven's works are are *twice as good* compared to Mozart's, and that would have to be *on average*.
You'd have to argue each of Borg's FO win is as impressive as 2 Nadal's.
That's the most ludicrous suggestion one could ever make since no one comes even remotely close to Mozart (Nadal on clay) let alone that someone would be "twice as good".
Now let's argue. ;)
But before that, listen all three movements not just your beloved second...
http://youtu.be/NgY0QcUjtYE

Mozart was just fine, but he wrote during a clown era:

https://www.grahamsmusic.net/post/mozart-s-contemporaries

Beethoven, on the other hand, had to face much stiffer competition:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beethoven_and_his_contemporaries

[jdeluise]

Post by *skriptis
So who is the goat? ;)

Bach, 100%

[*skriptis]

This is more meaningless than tennis debate. ;)

[Sawfish]

Post by *skriptis
This is more meaningless than tennis debate. ;)

Just as meaningless...

[*skriptis]

Post by *skriptis
This is more meaningless than tennis debate. ;)
Just as meaningless...

Tnx that's proper way to say it, "just as meaningless".

but what if you actually wanted to say what I tried, added weight to the statement or comparison? If it is not "more meaningless" is it ok to use "less meaningful"?


Sometimes saying "just as meaningless" doesn't seem strong enough.

[Sawfish]

Post by *skriptis

Post by *skriptis
This is more meaningless than tennis debate. ;)
Just as meaningless...

Tnx that's proper way to say it, "just as meaningless".
but what if you actually wanted to say what I tried, added weight to the statement or comparison? If it is not "more meaningless" is it ok to use "less meaningful"?
Sometimes saying "just as meaningless" doesn't seem strong enough.

Two issues:

There's nothing wrong or incorrect in your syntax. What I did (and
should have done a smiley) is that your phraseology meant that the
comparison between Mozart/Beethoven/Bach is has LESS meaning than the
normal banter on RST. I was suggesting that the meaningless is
identical: both the comparison of composers and the comparison of tennis
players are equally meaningless.

Minor, minor nuance.

Second issue:

Your recent posts that contain replies are now EASY to read again! They
have line breaks and are not all run together.

What did you do? I *REALLY* appreciate it!

[*skriptis]

Post by *skriptis
This is more meaningless than tennis debate. ;)
Just as meaningless...
Tnx that's proper way to say it, "just as meaningless".
but what if you actually wanted to say what I tried, added weight to the statement or comparison? If it is not "more meaningless" is it ok to use "less meaningful"?
Sometimes saying "just as meaningless" doesn't seem strong enough.
There's nothing wrong or incorrect in your syntax.
What I did (and should have done a smiley) is that your
phraseology meant that the comparison between
Mozart/Beethoven/Bach is has LESS meaning than the normal banter
on RST. I was suggesting that the meaningless is identical: both
the comparison of composers and the comparison of tennis players
are equally meaningless.
Minor, minor nuance.
Your recent posts that contain replies are now
EASY to read again! They have line breaks and are not all run
together.
What did you do? I *REALLY* appreciate it!
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The world's truth constitutes a vision so terrifying as to beggar the prophecies of the bleakest seer who ever walked it."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I did nothing it's one of your sigs that has the thing we've discussed making reading difficult. I just said noting to you and left it in reply I guess it solves quoting for you?




Yeah ok but I actually meant what I said.

Tennis discussions can have meaning and sense. E.g. discussing importance of e.g. Olympics title in modern setting is rather interesting stuff?

In tennis, it's a legit question why have Olympics become so important?


Meanwhile jdiscussing "who's the greatest composer" from 300 or 200 years aho doesn't really make much sense.

We all know it's about "I like this guy's music better", sometimes it's even not about music, it's what the guy stands for or represents so someone likes the image or projected image or whatever.

[Sawfish]

Post by *skriptis

Post by *skriptis
This is more meaningless than tennis debate. ;)
Just as meaningless...
Tnx that's proper way to say it, "just as meaningless".
but what if you actually wanted to say what I tried, added weight to the statement or comparison? If it is not "more meaningless" is it ok to use "less meaningful"?
Sometimes saying "just as meaningless" doesn't seem strong enough.
There's nothing wrong or incorrect in your syntax.
What I did (and should have done a smiley) is that your
phraseology meant that the comparison between
Mozart/Beethoven/Bach is has LESS meaning than the normal banter
on RST. I was suggesting that the meaningless is identical: both
the comparison of composers and the comparison of tennis players
are equally meaningless.
Minor, minor nuance.
Your recent posts that contain replies are now
EASY to read again! They have line breaks and are not all run
together.
What did you do? I *REALLY* appreciate it!
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The world's truth constitutes a vision so terrifying as to beggar the prophecies of the bleakest seer who ever walked it."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I did nothing it's one of your sigs that has the thing we've discussed making reading difficult. I just said noting to you and left it in reply I guess it solves quoting for you?

OK, but as I recall, I'm not the only reader here who has spotted this
stuff. I think it also happens in exchanges in which I have no
historical reply connection.

But, no matter. It's fine anyway.

Post by *skriptis
Yeah ok but I actually meant what I said.

It makes sense in relation to this particular newsgroup.

Post by *skriptis
Tennis discussions can have meaning and sense. E.g. discussing importance of e.g. Olympics title in modern setting is rather interesting stuff?

Mostly I'm interested only in the outcome of a contest, and much less
about the cumulative record and how this compares with others. However,
all this stuff I'm not interested in *is* highly appropriate for RST, so
this makes me odd man out on this issue.

Post by *skriptis
In tennis, it's a legit question why have Olympics become so important?

To me just another player to player match up and I see how (and
speculate *why*) it comes out like it does.

I have very little interest in predicting an upcoming match, usually.

Post by *skriptis
Meanwhile jdiscussing "who's the greatest composer" from 300 or 200 years aho doesn't really make much sense.

It's entirely subjective and what's more, it's open to individual
interpretation by each performer.

Post by *skriptis
We all know it's about "I like this guy's music better", sometimes it's even not about music, it's what the guy stands for or represents so someone likes the image or projected image or whatever.

Fuckin' people do this ALL THE TIME, with all kinds of people. Couldn't
possible be dumber.

It's one of the main reasons I'm a misanthrope.

[jdeluise]

Post by Sawfish
OK, but as I recall, I'm not the only reader here who has
spotted this
stuff. I think it also happens in exchanges in which I have no
historical reply connection.
But, no matter. It's fine anyway.

It's *skriptis' newsreader. Fucking luddites blame everyone else
for their own incompetence.

[*skriptis]

🇚🇳🈲🈳🈵🈎🈎

[Pelle Svanslös]

Post by jdeluise

Post by *skriptis
So who is the goat? ;)

Bach, 100%

The three great "B"s of German music. Bach, Schubert, Boney M.

[Whisper]

Post by Pelle Svanslös

Post by jdeluise

Post by *skriptis
So who is the goat? ;)

Bach, 100%

The three great "B"s of German music. Bach, Schubert, Boney M.

Four - Bieber

[The Iceberg]

Post by Whisper

Post by Pelle Svanslös

Post by jdeluise

Post by *skriptis
So who is the goat? ;)

Bach, 100%

The three great "B"s of German music. Bach, Schubert, Boney M.

Four - Bieber

you forgot the real goat, Britney!

[Whisper]

Post by *skriptis

Post by *skriptis
https://youtube.com/shorts/G3hFwoGT7zo?si=Yq_8ALsIMHEAOceq
That's why he's the goat.
Not sure that I can agree with his generalities. I
think it was a useful comparison--and for sure the two guys were
quite different, but me, I'd say that Mozart, in his best piano
pieces, writes to a situation or theme and in doing so gets at
profound and subtle emotional mixes, and Beethoven is more of a
purist in that he writes the piece to exercise an emotion or
emotions serially, rather than in concurrent blends of emotions.
Overall I prefer Beethoven for piano works, but
Mozart's Piano Concerto 21, 2nd movement, is my personal
favorite. Probably have listened to it maybe 50 times. Even own
a transcription for violin.

So who is the goat? ;)

Bach