Mozart is the most difficult composer

[Damien J. Bradley]

This is what my teacher told me she believes, and let me explain. First,
she said that classical (the exact classical period, not the whole
genre) is the hardest music to play, because "there is nothing to hide
behind" as there is with the emotional or odd aspects of romantic and
contempory music. Classical is clear, crystalline music and to get it to
sound right is very hard.

Mozart, then, being the quintessential classical composer (Beethoven is
leaning a bit more toward romantic), would be composer with the hardest
music to play perfectly.

This other guy I know described Mozart's music as extremely "exposing".
I think that's a good term.

What does everybody think of this? Has it been brought up before? It
certainly has given me a lot to think about.

Damien

[Cc88m]

For those who don't know how to analyze Mozart, he can be difficult to memorize
and to play because although his music usually looks simple and innocent, its
idea density is higher than anyone else. Because these ideas come flying in
from every direction, his apparently simple structures are actually quite
complex and very easy to forget even if you thought you memorized it. A prime
example is his frequent use of crossed hands -- in the crossed state, at least
one hand is in an extremely awkward position for playing, and a lot of people
have trouble keeping track of which hand is LH or RH. We've had lots of
threads on this so many are now tired of it. Look up my thread on how
Beethoven composed using group theory -- I also have a short section on how
Mozart composed.
C. C. Chang

[James Boyk]

This view of Mozart -- which I share -- is so common as to be a cliche.
The difficulty of realizing his scores in sound is why one so seldom
hears Mozart played, whether by pianists or orchestras; certainly not
because audiences don't like him, because they do. As Schnabel said,
"Mozart is too easy for beginners and too difficult for virtuosi." I
say, "Playing Mozart's easy. All you need do is play perfectly:
perfectly in the notes, perfectly in the gestures, perfectly in the
sequence of the feeling, perfectly in everything."

James Boyk

[Gail Mrozak]

I've played Mozart (not a lot), and sung Mozart choral and solo work.

It is not always the hardest technically, as Damien hinted. Yet,
because it seems as though Mozart tries to place nearly every voice or
line or instrument at its best advantage, there is not much of a "fudge
factor", where you can focus on the melody line or the key part of the
passage, and just give the rest your best shot.

My choral director also teaches music theory at Columbia College in
Chicago. He says that one of the tricks w/Mozart is that he hardly ever
takes a repeat exactly like the first time through. (He said he
discovered this while playing the piano part for all the Mozart violin
sonatas w/a violinist friend.) This means Mozart can be misleading
sight reading, because as soon as you think, "Oh yeah, this part again,"
he throws you a curve.

Mozart has been compared to architecture, and his work has so much
balance and structure, that the better you understand those elements,
the better you can perform the music. And the more music theory you
know, the more you can appreciate the work you are performing, although
I can't say if that extends to hearing a Mozart piece that you are not
familiar with.

What I can't get over is how he handles minor keys. Try the piano K
475! If you'd like to hear some choral work, I highly recommend his
Mass in c minor, which my community choir performed last spring. Some
of those chord progressions gave me the chills.

--
Gail Mrozak
who at one point in her life liked Haydn better!

[Ryan Morison]

I certainly agree. I also find Mozart "exposing"!
The level of tone control and the fact that Mozart wanted the piano to sing
like his operas make it difficult!

Ryan

[Tom Shaw]

I dont know if my guitar teacher copied Mozart in this or not but he wanted
us to try to imitate the human voice as much as possible in the "singing"
sense. Pretty tough on a plucked instrument like the guitar or the hammered
instrument like the piano...neither with any continuous sustain.
Apparenty Mozart and my teacher both thought the voice was the epitome of
musical expression...perhaps the violin would be next?
TS
"Ryan Morison" <mor...@iafrica.com> wrote in message
news:3a144...@news1.mweb.co.za...

[John Gavin]

I've heard this idea for many years - that Mozart is the most difficult.
I don't know if this is an empirical truth - I'm sure there are pianists
out there who might play Mozart very well but can't tackle the Godowsky
Passacaglia and vice versa.

I also wonder if a teacher instilling the idea that Mozart (or anyone
else) is the "most difficult composer" actually causes more harm than
good - afterall, if a student takes up the study of a Mozart Piano
Sonata with this idea, won't it create fear and inhibition?

I'd go as far as saying that even well known pianists often play Mozart
with too much self-consciousness and over-reverence these days -
polished but lacking in spontaneity - maybe this is the by-product of
placing Mozart on such a high pedestal.

[Alexandre Vovan]

John,

You are absolutely right about the "self-consciousness" problem with Mozart.
I've found in my studying years that a LOT of my collegues were afraid of
Mozart, simply because they were told it was difficult, or too exposing.
They were jealous of my Mozart playing, because I had no fear of the works
whatsoever, and that the music and the "singing" were free to exist when I
played.

But here's my view on this. The fear of being exposed, or the "clarity" and
simplicity of Mozart, that's just plain crap. A good pianist is ALWAYS nude
as soon as he touches the keyboard. What's this about being able to create
some "fudge" when playing romantic music? Or even worse, when playing
contemporary, atonal pieces? There should be no reason to do that in any
kind of music. That's a huge mistake that lots of students make, and after
some time being "tolerant" to this fudge-factor (so much that they eliminate
the Mozart or other exposing-type of music), they don't realize why they
can't communicate very well in concerts, competitions, etc, or anytime at
all. Yes, of course it's easier to smear the messages in a romantic Chopin.
But what makes a difference between a professional pianist and an amateur
one in a Chopin Barcarolle? Try fudge. I find there's a lot of fudge in
students' heads these days. The same quality of playing and understanding of
the music should be applied as much to Mozart than to Scriabin, or Messiaen,
or whoever else. If a chord in the bass line of a Chopin piece is a bit
misplaced in tone, then it should be feared as much as one in a Mozart
sonata. Thinking that way will open up the ears.

My two cents worth,

Alexandre

"John Gavin" <jg...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:26606-3A...@storefull-216.iap.bryant.webtv.net...

[ricky...@outlook.com]

Make no mistake: on the whole, Mozart is absolutely difficult to perform appropriately. He possesses everything: technical difficulty, trickery, complex and ellaborated harmonic progressions, fugues, and a sensitivity like no other. Sometimes simple, sometimes incredibly complex. Some people had better get to know the real masterpieces composed by Mozart. Find the Pignus Futurae Gloria from the Litaniae de venerabili Altaris Sacramento KV125. Listen to it. Get the score and read it. Analyze the outstanding progressions, the unbelievable complexity and richness. And, of course, such a beauty second to none.

Once you do that, you'll agree with my opening statement.