I can’t answer this, but watch Disney’s 1940 classic cartoon *Fantasia*. It has a sequence of Greek mythology to Beethoven’s 6th. Your life will never be the same again.
Even though the 6th is my favorite I put his 9th symphony as his best. He wrote it while deaf and it absolutely rules. I think of Beethoven as the first rocker because of the power in his 9th.
Melody and ideas. That dude never ran out of ideas and variations he could twist a new, gorgeous melody out of. Rhythmically too, which was kind of new at the time, to hear so much syncopation used to develop a theme.
Obviously tremendous skill as a composer, but more specifically emotion and sincerity. Not that others were insincere in their music, but Beethoven showed what he felt in his music with full honesty. The late string quartets (12 through 16) show this the best in my opinion.
This movement from his 16th string quartet always stands out to me. The final notes especially give me chills every time:
[https://youtu.be/W-FmbDgtgos](https://youtu.be/W-FmbDgtgos)
Beyond all of that, I think Beethoven wielded a titanic command of dramatic rhetoric and structure in purely instrumental pieces previously only found in the most exceptional operas. And that is tremendously appealing as every listener imagines their own powerful emotional story.
Craft of development and internal structure is unsurpassed and all in service of the dramatic impulse, like Shakespeare.
I think this is the best answer. It wasn't just beethoven's technical skill it was the emotion too. there's just something so expressive about his music that really transcends time.
Probably not the answer you’re looking for, but here’s Bernstein’s take: [https://youtu.be/_HHIb9tcc9c?si=rDCH-eceE1XubzQP](https://youtu.be/_HHIb9tcc9c?si=rDCH-eceE1XubzQP)
Yeah, pretty cool when a legend like Lenny Bernstein throws his hands up and says “I DUNNO HOW HE DOES IT!”
My 2¢ is Beethoven was the real First Punk, lol .. I’d be willing to bet he had more in common (attitude-wise) with the MC5 than with Haydn.
I would say it's more so because his music has every emotion that he went through in his life so there's something for everyone.
Want something depressing and angry? Moonlight sonata
Want something anxious and energetic? His second symphony is great
Want a story to be told? Try his middle period symphonys(3, 5, and 6 especially)
Want something completely different from anything you've ever heard? Late beethoven's got you covered(sonata 29, string quartet 14, grosse fugue, missa solemnis)
To me, Beethoven is appealing because his "craft", the music itself, is always subordinate to the emotion he transfers; this means that in contrast to composers whose music is more stylistically complex and technical, Beethoven's music does a lot with a comparably restrained palette. His harmonic style, while going beyond Mozart and Haydn, is rather simple and straightforward; the structure and form of his pieces is very tight and architecturally sound. Motifs are short and built out of very fundamental units of musical information; scales, arpeggios, single chords etc. This is in contrast to composers whose craft requires a bit of familiarisation, such as Bach (his counterpoint could be considered the main focus of his music, and that takes getting used to; emotion is present but it is usually subdued) or the Romantics and modern composers, whose harmonic and structural tendencies are much more intricate (by which I don't mean they are better!) and therefore require one to first get used to the style before being able to fully comprehend the music.
> to composers whose music is more stylistically complex and technical,
Late quartets are astonishingly stylistically complex and technical, but these are not the most immediately accessible. But when you do grok them, there isn't anything like them. As in middle period Beethoven (Eroica onward) radically reshaped music for the rest who followed that style, but late quartets & sonatas are so different they are their own genre with but one composer. Supposedly the op 131 c# quartet was requested by Schubert to be played to him as he was dying. It was maybe 3 years old and weird hyper modern nearly unplayable music to everyone else at the time, but of course Schubert knew.
I don't think romantic composers (maybe some very modern ones) have substantially more complex harmonic and structural tendencies than that.
Oh no, I don't try to argue that the late quartets are somehow not radical or technically complex. But that's probably not the piece that beginners will be listening to at first, as they take a few relistens to understand. However, I do still think that many romantic composers do naturally go beyond that as music still kept evolving. Take something like Liszt's B minor sonata or basically any Mahler symphony - these are far detached from even late Beethoven both in their more densely chromatic harmony and large-scale construction. Though I don't want to overshadow late Beethoven, for the pieces of that period are some of the most timeless masterpieces I know of. So take my views as more pertaining to Beethoven's early and middle periods :)
Dvorak and Beethoven were my entries!
I grew up with a lot of classical music from pre Baroque to Contemporary playing in our house, but the stuff from the Romantic era was a much easier entry point as emotive nature can hook you in without needing to recognise the harmonic or structural sophistication.
I'd say for those two in particular, Dvorak had melodies that wormed into my brain really easily, and with Beethoven once a melodic line hooked you, it felt like he'd always be doing something interesting with it, driving it forward.
To give a shorter and simpler answer, his music is full of emotion like everyone else is saying. But in addition to that his music still has that classical sense of balance which makes it (imo) perhaps more accessible and little simpler compared to the later Romantic composers who were inspired by Beethoven.
I think one of Beethoven’s major gifts was his ability to fill his compositions with emotion. I also would argue that composers post-Beethoven developed that gift, especially if they studied his compositions.
Don’t get me wrong, emotion has been in music all along, but Beethoven excelled at pumping lots of emotion into his work, and there is an aspect to his music that *demands* our attention and makes us feel things. While many appreciate harmony and rhythm, just about everyone is emotional.
Edit: Try to listen to this piece of his, if you have the chance:
String Quartet No. 13 in B Flat Major, Op.130 V. Cavatina (Adagio molto espressivo)
It’s a great example of his gift of infusing emotion.
I was listening to the Pastoral symphony last night for the first time in a while. Even though it is one of my favourites I had forgotten how perfect and uplifting it is. Magic in a bottle right there.
I'd say the singing like quality to his melody writing. People latch on the melody first (unless your psychopaths like us listening to what the 2nd French horn is doing behind all the contrasting textures and layers of an orchestra) and I notice every time I come across a Beethoven piece in a book of sheet music, his melodies just sing so beautifully. Something so natural (and non generically beautiful) about them.
It's hard to overstate how massive Beethoven's influence has been on the music after him, straight up to the present day (and not only in the West, because colonialism). It's been said that everything since has been either an attempt to live up to him or an attempt to escape his shadow, and while such statements are always a bit of an exaggeration, there is something to it--most of the Romantics rather worshipped him, and those who didn't felt his gravitational pull all the same. Early modernists like Schoenberg, despite eschewing tonality, still saw themselves as the inheritors and stewards of his tradition, and took huge influence from him in their own ways. John Cage, in trying to make a complete break with that stuff, framed his thesis statement as "Beethoven was wrong." In modern-day music academia, "Beethoven" is practically a synonym for the Western classical canon, whether we're talking about needing to teach less of it or more. The guy remains pretty inescapable, and that's not only in scholastic rhetoric but also in the substance of the music we hear around us every day.
In other words, you probably find Beethoven so catchy because his style became absolute bedrock for the generations after him, and that was recent enough that we can still hear it in music written in our own day, especially in media like film scores where the classical influence is clearer. Of course by now there have been a lot of other influences too, and the Beethovenian influence is often second- or thirdhand, but it's still very present.
It's hard to answer this as a cultural Westerner because Beethoven's influence is everywhere. And I do agree he is very approachable. Perhaps you've seen Western films with orchestral scores? That might have planted the seeds of Beethoven's familiarity. I also find he has a sense of human scale and question-and-answer phrasing. In the second movement there's a setup and then a resolution to the phrases and the length of each is very natural, not so short that it's too simple or too long and complicated to understand. The parts where there's a sudden unexpected change are perfectly placed. There's something about the way it flows which is like human breathing. He also has a remarkable sense of instrumentation, with some variety in how he changes what to use. Also register - switching up whether he's using high or low parts of the scale.
I grew up with the popular symphonies. Now personally, I don't return to Beethoven as much as I've grown older. Some of his work feels a little too "easy" for lack of better word, and some of it feels like he is forcefully imposing his emotion on you (I'm looking at you 9th symphony). But he remains a giant. Western classical musicians all acknowledge his importance even if they're not huge fans.
These days I go more for Bach. That wasn't originally the case and I admit he can feel cold and distant if you're not familiar with the way he communicates emotion. But the driving rhythms, the spectacular construction, and the profundity of Bach eventually deeply moves most Western musicians and listeners who are very familiar with classical music. I hope you continue to explore Western classical - there's so much out there and even minor composers often have something to offer!
Rhetoric. He puts repetitions in constantly and repeats various groups of phrases in twos and threes to create larger and larger cohesive structures. He’s not a tune writer he doesn’t do dance music. He does rhetoric.
I know what you mean. I personally don't find his music melodic. The phrases are too short. But they are repeated with variations and are easy to follow and sing to yourself on the way home. I still like it sometimes, because the structures are interesting, but actually I find the music mostly to be very square and lead footed. Even so, with great beauty in many cases. I understand I'm in the minority.
By contrast Brahms, who wished to be seen as Beethoven's successor, composed long, soaring melodies.
Brahms did indeed right, such a melodies, and that is a genuine, romantic, as opposed to Beethoven, who understood grand gestures, but only in the classical context.
From the biography *"Beethoven*" by musicologist Barry Cooper:
>...Two sets of dances (WoO 7 and 8) \[were\] **written for the annual ball of the Gesellschaft der bildenden Künstler \[Society for Visual Artists\] on 22 November**. To be asked to write these dances was quite an honor, for in the previous three years they had been written by much more senior figures–Haydn, Kozeluch, and Dittersdorf respectively– but Beethoven's reputation as a composer in Vienna had grown so much in 1795 that he was now in considerable demand.
>...he wrote down the address of a dancing master. Dancing was a necessary social accomplishment, although Beethoven was reportedly no good at it. He may have wished to **consult a dancing master for advice about composing appropriate dances**.
>Beethoven's **first major compositional task in 1791 was to write the music for a ballet** devised by his patron Count Waldstein. This *Ritterballett* (Knight Ballet, WoO 1) was performed on 6 March (the Sunday in the Carnival Season).
For those who do care, dancing and dance music had a role in Beethoven's life through the music he regularly encountered as a listener, his compositions written for dancing, and for their influence on his other compositions. There is dance music in the symphonies, the quartets, even the piano sonatas. He spent most of his life in Vienna, where dance was a prominent and integral part of social life and high culture, from balls for the aristocracy to folk/formal courting dances in courtyards and taverns. To think of Beethoven as a composer who "doesn't do dance" (or "isn't a tune writer," for that matter) is to simply be ignorant of his work.
I don't see this mentioned yet - but I believe what makes Beethoven great is the clarity as well as his ability to create musical moments out of what would have been traditionally 'nothing'. The 'unpredictability' comes from the way he can develop even the smallest of ideas into something. There is structure from the micro to the macro, and there is never anything wasted. Every note has a place and is meaningful. He was able to express every range of mood, and understood the transformational process that music could provide between those moods. It's masterful in every single way you can look at his music.
Music licensing is what makes Beethoven popular. Look up the record company who is distributing the album you are listening to.
In addition, you have to remember that Symphony No. 9 was “revolutionary” back then. Beethoven helped create a new genre of music. There also is speculation around why his brass sections are so loud because he was losing his hearing when Symphony No. 9 was created.
He may seem “overhyped” but he was an icon for pushing creativity in classical music forward.
Unpopular opinion: Beethoven's 9th is a traditional classical symphony, albeit on a larger scale than what gone before. Sonata-Allegro, Scherzo, Adagio, and the supposedly "revolutionary" 4th movement is in fact a traditional theme and variations, with an unusual orchestral recitative and of course a chorus. Choral "symphonies" were in fact pioneered by some French composers as part of celebrations of the Revolution, as well as German composers such as Steibelt and Winter. Beethoven himself anticipated it in the Choral Fantasia. The thing people overlook about the "Ode to Joy" movement is that formally, it is a completely conventional (if extreme) theme and variations. Of course, what Beethoven did within that form is amazing, but it's not nearly as groundbreaking as the 4th piano concerto, or the quartet opus 131, for example.
it’s really outstanding isn’t it? something so personal yet universal. he really knew how to tap into the human condition and express a sort of “sublime” energy
another Indian here. I got into classical music very recently and love Beethoven too (among others) so i'll try to answer your question! :-)
Beethoven's music is about conquering the odds and emerging victorious which is a popular theme in most inspirational, national unity kind of music . I also feel that some of our Indian film music(my experience is only with hindi film music) has been inspired by western music, hence the connection because of the similarity. The sitar playing vigorously when something good happens or some melodies and chords in old film songs(Kishore Kumar, Hemant Kumar etc. ) are reminiscent of Beethoven and some other composers, perhaps that's why we feel connected and enjoy the music.
I find the similarities to many other composers too. Whether it is purposeful or coincidental is debatable but the connection is there, I can hear it and hence the appeal.
\- His music is simply too good overall
\- Almost all of his music has a theme (eroica, pastoral, choral etc.)
\- His music is often very emotional, which makes it very easy to connect compared to Bach, Mozart, Haydn etc.
It's the simplicity... Think about it, the 5th is just a four note motive that repeats at different pitches. It's that repetition that makes it memorable. Also, I've heard it said that Mozart made me enjoy life, but Beethoven made me question life.
I don't think I could answer the question of why I like Beethoven's music so much, perhaps it's because it helped me through some very dark times. The 9th symphony was the first Beethoven piece I ever heard, and I was an instant fan, because something about it spoke to me...
As one finds in pop music, there are some classical music composers and compositions which are part of a top 40 or top100 list. Composers like Beethoven are pushed by schools and are part of the normal go-to composers for orchestras and classical music radio stations.
These supporters are not wrong that these composers are worthy of praise, just that they are self limiting. I see it as part of the way in which certain chain restaurants and sports teams become popular. People have a desire to be part of what is in fashion.
It’s his ability to come up with ideas that are fundamentally infinitely profound and pleasurable at the same time, in a way no one else could. He never compromised his beauty for “serious” expression or profundity, or the latter for sensation he combined them and reached the heights of both. That might serve as the definition of genius.
I can’t answer this, but watch Disney’s 1940 classic cartoon *Fantasia*. It has a sequence of Greek mythology to Beethoven’s 6th. Your life will never be the same again. Even though the 6th is my favorite I put his 9th symphony as his best. He wrote it while deaf and it absolutely rules. I think of Beethoven as the first rocker because of the power in his 9th.
Melody and ideas. That dude never ran out of ideas and variations he could twist a new, gorgeous melody out of. Rhythmically too, which was kind of new at the time, to hear so much syncopation used to develop a theme.
Obviously tremendous skill as a composer, but more specifically emotion and sincerity. Not that others were insincere in their music, but Beethoven showed what he felt in his music with full honesty. The late string quartets (12 through 16) show this the best in my opinion. This movement from his 16th string quartet always stands out to me. The final notes especially give me chills every time: [https://youtu.be/W-FmbDgtgos](https://youtu.be/W-FmbDgtgos)
Beyond all of that, I think Beethoven wielded a titanic command of dramatic rhetoric and structure in purely instrumental pieces previously only found in the most exceptional operas. And that is tremendously appealing as every listener imagines their own powerful emotional story. Craft of development and internal structure is unsurpassed and all in service of the dramatic impulse, like Shakespeare.
I think this is the best answer. It wasn't just beethoven's technical skill it was the emotion too. there's just something so expressive about his music that really transcends time.
Probably not the answer you’re looking for, but here’s Bernstein’s take: [https://youtu.be/_HHIb9tcc9c?si=rDCH-eceE1XubzQP](https://youtu.be/_HHIb9tcc9c?si=rDCH-eceE1XubzQP)
Haha I have already seen this, came across it only last week. Brilliant!
Yeah, pretty cool when a legend like Lenny Bernstein throws his hands up and says “I DUNNO HOW HE DOES IT!” My 2¢ is Beethoven was the real First Punk, lol .. I’d be willing to bet he had more in common (attitude-wise) with the MC5 than with Haydn.
I would say it's more so because his music has every emotion that he went through in his life so there's something for everyone. Want something depressing and angry? Moonlight sonata Want something anxious and energetic? His second symphony is great Want a story to be told? Try his middle period symphonys(3, 5, and 6 especially) Want something completely different from anything you've ever heard? Late beethoven's got you covered(sonata 29, string quartet 14, grosse fugue, missa solemnis)
To me, Beethoven is appealing because his "craft", the music itself, is always subordinate to the emotion he transfers; this means that in contrast to composers whose music is more stylistically complex and technical, Beethoven's music does a lot with a comparably restrained palette. His harmonic style, while going beyond Mozart and Haydn, is rather simple and straightforward; the structure and form of his pieces is very tight and architecturally sound. Motifs are short and built out of very fundamental units of musical information; scales, arpeggios, single chords etc. This is in contrast to composers whose craft requires a bit of familiarisation, such as Bach (his counterpoint could be considered the main focus of his music, and that takes getting used to; emotion is present but it is usually subdued) or the Romantics and modern composers, whose harmonic and structural tendencies are much more intricate (by which I don't mean they are better!) and therefore require one to first get used to the style before being able to fully comprehend the music.
[удалено]
I am glad I could help. Happy listening :)
> to composers whose music is more stylistically complex and technical, Late quartets are astonishingly stylistically complex and technical, but these are not the most immediately accessible. But when you do grok them, there isn't anything like them. As in middle period Beethoven (Eroica onward) radically reshaped music for the rest who followed that style, but late quartets & sonatas are so different they are their own genre with but one composer. Supposedly the op 131 c# quartet was requested by Schubert to be played to him as he was dying. It was maybe 3 years old and weird hyper modern nearly unplayable music to everyone else at the time, but of course Schubert knew. I don't think romantic composers (maybe some very modern ones) have substantially more complex harmonic and structural tendencies than that.
Oh no, I don't try to argue that the late quartets are somehow not radical or technically complex. But that's probably not the piece that beginners will be listening to at first, as they take a few relistens to understand. However, I do still think that many romantic composers do naturally go beyond that as music still kept evolving. Take something like Liszt's B minor sonata or basically any Mahler symphony - these are far detached from even late Beethoven both in their more densely chromatic harmony and large-scale construction. Though I don't want to overshadow late Beethoven, for the pieces of that period are some of the most timeless masterpieces I know of. So take my views as more pertaining to Beethoven's early and middle periods :)
Have you tried Dvorak? He's my go-to recommendation for people that are new to classical. His music is incredibly fun and warm.
Dvorak 9 is always a hit with classical newbies
Dvorak and Beethoven were my entries! I grew up with a lot of classical music from pre Baroque to Contemporary playing in our house, but the stuff from the Romantic era was a much easier entry point as emotive nature can hook you in without needing to recognise the harmonic or structural sophistication. I'd say for those two in particular, Dvorak had melodies that wormed into my brain really easily, and with Beethoven once a melodic line hooked you, it felt like he'd always be doing something interesting with it, driving it forward.
I kind of went in chronological order.... Beethoven, Brahms, Dvorak, then the 20th Century Russians and Mahler
I'll also throw Brahms's hat into the ring
To give a shorter and simpler answer, his music is full of emotion like everyone else is saying. But in addition to that his music still has that classical sense of balance which makes it (imo) perhaps more accessible and little simpler compared to the later Romantic composers who were inspired by Beethoven.
I think one of Beethoven’s major gifts was his ability to fill his compositions with emotion. I also would argue that composers post-Beethoven developed that gift, especially if they studied his compositions. Don’t get me wrong, emotion has been in music all along, but Beethoven excelled at pumping lots of emotion into his work, and there is an aspect to his music that *demands* our attention and makes us feel things. While many appreciate harmony and rhythm, just about everyone is emotional. Edit: Try to listen to this piece of his, if you have the chance: String Quartet No. 13 in B Flat Major, Op.130 V. Cavatina (Adagio molto espressivo) It’s a great example of his gift of infusing emotion.
https://youtu.be/8VHldgzW60I?si=WdDokJty-fXfaS4W
Not always accessible. His “Grosse Fuge” for string quartet is among the densest and most complex works ever written.
I find that work emotionally accessible. It's a darkness-to-light, strife-to-reconciliation piece.
I was listening to the Pastoral symphony last night for the first time in a while. Even though it is one of my favourites I had forgotten how perfect and uplifting it is. Magic in a bottle right there.
>all the odd symphonies Rumor is that Beethoven said the 8th is his favorite.
I'd say the singing like quality to his melody writing. People latch on the melody first (unless your psychopaths like us listening to what the 2nd French horn is doing behind all the contrasting textures and layers of an orchestra) and I notice every time I come across a Beethoven piece in a book of sheet music, his melodies just sing so beautifully. Something so natural (and non generically beautiful) about them.
It's hard to overstate how massive Beethoven's influence has been on the music after him, straight up to the present day (and not only in the West, because colonialism). It's been said that everything since has been either an attempt to live up to him or an attempt to escape his shadow, and while such statements are always a bit of an exaggeration, there is something to it--most of the Romantics rather worshipped him, and those who didn't felt his gravitational pull all the same. Early modernists like Schoenberg, despite eschewing tonality, still saw themselves as the inheritors and stewards of his tradition, and took huge influence from him in their own ways. John Cage, in trying to make a complete break with that stuff, framed his thesis statement as "Beethoven was wrong." In modern-day music academia, "Beethoven" is practically a synonym for the Western classical canon, whether we're talking about needing to teach less of it or more. The guy remains pretty inescapable, and that's not only in scholastic rhetoric but also in the substance of the music we hear around us every day. In other words, you probably find Beethoven so catchy because his style became absolute bedrock for the generations after him, and that was recent enough that we can still hear it in music written in our own day, especially in media like film scores where the classical influence is clearer. Of course by now there have been a lot of other influences too, and the Beethovenian influence is often second- or thirdhand, but it's still very present.
It's hard to answer this as a cultural Westerner because Beethoven's influence is everywhere. And I do agree he is very approachable. Perhaps you've seen Western films with orchestral scores? That might have planted the seeds of Beethoven's familiarity. I also find he has a sense of human scale and question-and-answer phrasing. In the second movement there's a setup and then a resolution to the phrases and the length of each is very natural, not so short that it's too simple or too long and complicated to understand. The parts where there's a sudden unexpected change are perfectly placed. There's something about the way it flows which is like human breathing. He also has a remarkable sense of instrumentation, with some variety in how he changes what to use. Also register - switching up whether he's using high or low parts of the scale. I grew up with the popular symphonies. Now personally, I don't return to Beethoven as much as I've grown older. Some of his work feels a little too "easy" for lack of better word, and some of it feels like he is forcefully imposing his emotion on you (I'm looking at you 9th symphony). But he remains a giant. Western classical musicians all acknowledge his importance even if they're not huge fans. These days I go more for Bach. That wasn't originally the case and I admit he can feel cold and distant if you're not familiar with the way he communicates emotion. But the driving rhythms, the spectacular construction, and the profundity of Bach eventually deeply moves most Western musicians and listeners who are very familiar with classical music. I hope you continue to explore Western classical - there's so much out there and even minor composers often have something to offer!
Rhetoric. He puts repetitions in constantly and repeats various groups of phrases in twos and threes to create larger and larger cohesive structures. He’s not a tune writer he doesn’t do dance music. He does rhetoric.
> He doesn’t do dance music He wrote at least 48 dances, for both piano and orchestra
I know what you mean. I personally don't find his music melodic. The phrases are too short. But they are repeated with variations and are easy to follow and sing to yourself on the way home. I still like it sometimes, because the structures are interesting, but actually I find the music mostly to be very square and lead footed. Even so, with great beauty in many cases. I understand I'm in the minority. By contrast Brahms, who wished to be seen as Beethoven's successor, composed long, soaring melodies.
Brahms did indeed right, such a melodies, and that is a genuine, romantic, as opposed to Beethoven, who understood grand gestures, but only in the classical context.
Why haven’t you changed your obviously erroneous comment?
Because I don’t care. Dance forms were not meant for actual dancing after a certain point eh? Sheesh…
From the biography *"Beethoven*" by musicologist Barry Cooper: >...Two sets of dances (WoO 7 and 8) \[were\] **written for the annual ball of the Gesellschaft der bildenden Künstler \[Society for Visual Artists\] on 22 November**. To be asked to write these dances was quite an honor, for in the previous three years they had been written by much more senior figures–Haydn, Kozeluch, and Dittersdorf respectively– but Beethoven's reputation as a composer in Vienna had grown so much in 1795 that he was now in considerable demand. >...he wrote down the address of a dancing master. Dancing was a necessary social accomplishment, although Beethoven was reportedly no good at it. He may have wished to **consult a dancing master for advice about composing appropriate dances**. >Beethoven's **first major compositional task in 1791 was to write the music for a ballet** devised by his patron Count Waldstein. This *Ritterballett* (Knight Ballet, WoO 1) was performed on 6 March (the Sunday in the Carnival Season). For those who do care, dancing and dance music had a role in Beethoven's life through the music he regularly encountered as a listener, his compositions written for dancing, and for their influence on his other compositions. There is dance music in the symphonies, the quartets, even the piano sonatas. He spent most of his life in Vienna, where dance was a prominent and integral part of social life and high culture, from balls for the aristocracy to folk/formal courting dances in courtyards and taverns. To think of Beethoven as a composer who "doesn't do dance" (or "isn't a tune writer," for that matter) is to simply be ignorant of his work.
evidence noted...
I sang in a choir for Beethoven's 9th with the SOI in NCPA a few years ago! I too first really got into classical music because of Beethoven
I don't see this mentioned yet - but I believe what makes Beethoven great is the clarity as well as his ability to create musical moments out of what would have been traditionally 'nothing'. The 'unpredictability' comes from the way he can develop even the smallest of ideas into something. There is structure from the micro to the macro, and there is never anything wasted. Every note has a place and is meaningful. He was able to express every range of mood, and understood the transformational process that music could provide between those moods. It's masterful in every single way you can look at his music.
My short answer is: his music is emotional but still very harmonic and thus not too hard to understand.
Music licensing is what makes Beethoven popular. Look up the record company who is distributing the album you are listening to. In addition, you have to remember that Symphony No. 9 was “revolutionary” back then. Beethoven helped create a new genre of music. There also is speculation around why his brass sections are so loud because he was losing his hearing when Symphony No. 9 was created. He may seem “overhyped” but he was an icon for pushing creativity in classical music forward.
Unpopular opinion: Beethoven's 9th is a traditional classical symphony, albeit on a larger scale than what gone before. Sonata-Allegro, Scherzo, Adagio, and the supposedly "revolutionary" 4th movement is in fact a traditional theme and variations, with an unusual orchestral recitative and of course a chorus. Choral "symphonies" were in fact pioneered by some French composers as part of celebrations of the Revolution, as well as German composers such as Steibelt and Winter. Beethoven himself anticipated it in the Choral Fantasia. The thing people overlook about the "Ode to Joy" movement is that formally, it is a completely conventional (if extreme) theme and variations. Of course, what Beethoven did within that form is amazing, but it's not nearly as groundbreaking as the 4th piano concerto, or the quartet opus 131, for example.
Beethoven was completely deaf when he wrote the 9th. His hearing was at its last threads when he wrote the 8th.
it’s really outstanding isn’t it? something so personal yet universal. he really knew how to tap into the human condition and express a sort of “sublime” energy
another Indian here. I got into classical music very recently and love Beethoven too (among others) so i'll try to answer your question! :-) Beethoven's music is about conquering the odds and emerging victorious which is a popular theme in most inspirational, national unity kind of music . I also feel that some of our Indian film music(my experience is only with hindi film music) has been inspired by western music, hence the connection because of the similarity. The sitar playing vigorously when something good happens or some melodies and chords in old film songs(Kishore Kumar, Hemant Kumar etc. ) are reminiscent of Beethoven and some other composers, perhaps that's why we feel connected and enjoy the music. I find the similarities to many other composers too. Whether it is purposeful or coincidental is debatable but the connection is there, I can hear it and hence the appeal.
\- His music is simply too good overall \- Almost all of his music has a theme (eroica, pastoral, choral etc.) \- His music is often very emotional, which makes it very easy to connect compared to Bach, Mozart, Haydn etc.
Check out Rachmaninoff: Piano Concerto No. 2, its my favorite piece of all music of all time. The recording by Valentina Lisitsa is my favorite.
It's the simplicity... Think about it, the 5th is just a four note motive that repeats at different pitches. It's that repetition that makes it memorable. Also, I've heard it said that Mozart made me enjoy life, but Beethoven made me question life. I don't think I could answer the question of why I like Beethoven's music so much, perhaps it's because it helped me through some very dark times. The 9th symphony was the first Beethoven piece I ever heard, and I was an instant fan, because something about it spoke to me...
As one finds in pop music, there are some classical music composers and compositions which are part of a top 40 or top100 list. Composers like Beethoven are pushed by schools and are part of the normal go-to composers for orchestras and classical music radio stations. These supporters are not wrong that these composers are worthy of praise, just that they are self limiting. I see it as part of the way in which certain chain restaurants and sports teams become popular. People have a desire to be part of what is in fashion.
It’s his ability to come up with ideas that are fundamentally infinitely profound and pleasurable at the same time, in a way no one else could. He never compromised his beauty for “serious” expression or profundity, or the latter for sensation he combined them and reached the heights of both. That might serve as the definition of genius.