Mozart sonatas

I've been analyzing some Mozart sonatas and didn't know they were so simple, I mean they are 2 + 2 = 4. I thought WTF they are all the same thing but after hearing them again just for joy I allmost cryed they are justo so...... (sorry, no word exists for this). I mean even the name M.O.Z.A.R.T makes me laugh for sweetnes his an angel.

Yeah, Mozart was pretty good.

Aye, sometimes they can really touch you, but other times Mozart's style just doesn't appeal to me.

simplicity and beauty are two completely different things. Some of mozarts pieces are just so right on.

I think I may know how you feel jsoldi. Mozart can be a marvel of clarity, of what is absolutely right in music, and taking the time to study him in depth can reveal things that seem miraculous. I have tried to emulate his aesthetic in my own music to the extent I'm able, with varying degrees of success. I've long since despaired of ever getting it absolutely right, because I'm not Mozart.

Lately I find myself restless and hungry for something less perfect, yet still satisfying. I'm studying the Mannhein symphonists again, as well as other composers of the Galant/Rococo aesthetics. I've also taken an intense liking to Anton Reicha (1770-1836), a contemporary and friend of Beethoven who was highly individual in his musical expression, much the way composers such as Boccherini and Scarlatti were (though for different reasons; the latter were Italian expatriates who settled in Spain and came by their individuality through isolation, whereas Reicha spent his career in Vienna and Paris in the thick of musical society and still went his own way...a very different path from Beethoven, by the way, who respected him greatly).

I guess I find myself wanting to explore a different corner of the same Classical box I've sealed myself into, diametrically opposite from the one Mozart occupies.

Rainbows, I don't think jsoldi was casting aspersions at Mozart here. I assumed from his tone that he was sharing his awe at the wonderful simplicity of Mozart's approach as he observed it while analyzing his sonatas - a sentiment some of us share. I know that when I find something amazing, I like to share it with others.

Being that you are new here, I'm a bit surprised at your attitude. If you like, you could always raise the level of conversation a knotch by saying something helpful yourself.

Here's hoping that your experience of YC improves from here. As a senior member here, I can tell you that there is much of value here if you're open to it. Of course, I'm firmly of the belief that most people create their experience, and it usually mirrors their own attitude. What are you looking for, anyway?

Just because I'm a stickler (and a jerk)...

Mozart didn't have 600 opus numbers... he has around 700 pieces to his catalogue's name (or something around there).

Ok, I've said it.

To comment on the actual topic, however- I find Mozart to embody simplicity... in a good way. His themes have a very "tunelike" quality to them and he almost never abandons himself in his piano concertos to sheer virtuosity. I'm playing his first flute concerto (in G), and nothing is hard there, it's definately in the "I need to practice this two or three times before I perform it technically" category, but it's so beautiful, it's worth weeks of practice to get the interpretation "just right."

Unfortunately, I have found myself unable to foster anything more than an appreciation of Mozart's innate ability to compose balanced, pleasant music. In lack of the inborn taste for his music that J.L. Graham (and possibly Jsoldi) possesses, it's proved incredibly difficult for me to grow into a liking of his style.

I don't want to make sweeping aspersions as to why I don't enjoy Mozart's output (partly because I daresay they'll be precisely the reasons others adore it), except to say that had Mozart not died at such an horrifically young age, I may well have been telling quite a different story. To continue the thread of discussion however (and completely contravene the noble promise I made at the start of this paragraph), it's precisely the balance and 'simplicity' of Mozart's music that fails to move me. I find it oh-so-easy to listen to, but nigh impossible to listen to. With the exception of the opening of the Dissonance Quartet, the Adagio and Fugue (either for string quartet or two pianos) and Symphonies 40 & 41, I've found most Mozart rather uninteresting. If anyone can suggest output of his that's similar to these, then I'll certainly give it a try. Sadly, the majority I've encountered to this date falls into the 'super-naive theme' / 'aeroplane-takeoff music' category.

I feel inclined to concur with Alma Mahler, when she wrote, after an 1899 performance of a Mozart Symphony that, 'Times have changed. Nowadays nobody wants such hyper-naive themes.'

Mozart neither. Check KV 511, A rondo in A minor which is VERY untypical for his style, written in 1787 it showcases traces of a quasi anachronistic polystylism. One of the parts of the rondo is done entirely in counterpoint (not just any counterpoint, but Bach's exact style near the end) the cadence is very untypical for using a napolitan subdominant chord in a progression which constitutes the only singe example of such usage for the entire Vienna Classic period, nevermind that the form is uncertain and includes a lot of elements later found by the beginning of the romantic period, such as fake harmonies, faux bourdon in chromantics, etc etc. The beginning itself is VERY untypical for Mozart or the Vienna classic, you can hear it right away.

Also very atypical for composers to even write single pieces (at the time), but since the rondo was written before any sonata, it couldn't be integrated into a sonata because the sonata would be extremely weird because of the elements in the rondo (As the most important movement is the FIRST movement in a sonata, it'd be REALLY strange if the first two would be less strange than the ending. He'd have to write the other movements just as strange (for his style) or write them as to compensate for the ending, which would be also atypical.)

Mozart started to get really interesting, then he died. Lame.

I'm familiar KV511, it's very interesting, though I'm not convinced that it's quite as 'untypical' as you imply. The fact is, this very experimentation is a hallmark of the late Mozart's style. I'd not noticed any Bach pastiche in KV511, but his Fugue in G minor (KV401-375e) showcases Mozart's seemingly underexploited skill for neo-baroque counterpoint brilliantly. Actually, I've always thought KV511's opening statements are rather suggestive of Chopin.

If you're interested, other less orthodox pieces of Mozart I've enjoyed are:

The 'Modulating prelude' in F major-E minor (KV deest)
Eine kleine Gigue in G (KV574)
Allegro in G min (KV312-590d)
Kleiner Trauermarsch in C min (KV453a)

Each of these works hints at developments which would take another half-century to reappear, and, as I'm sure you're aware, most were written around the time Mozart started drawing heavily upon the late baroque tradition. In all honesty, I think the music I'll like is there, hidden amidst Mozart's nigh-superhuman oeuvre. I just need to locate it.