In which we explore what Beethoven's music would sound like if he were just kinda...meh. Join my Patreon: / marcevanstein Learn more about lessons: teaching.marcev... Attend my Summer Workshop at Stanford: ccrma.stanford...
Having them side by side at the end really helped for me. The "sucky" version was perfectly lovely and Beethovenesque to my untrained ear, but the real thing after it felt like a warm bath in comparison.
that is EXACTLY what i thought. his "sucky" version reminds me of high school uncomfortably sharply... but theres a bit of nostalgia that makes up for it
Is that what the captions said? I have to tell you, I dictate scripts into my phone as a first step, and I cannot tell you how many times I had to correct "bag of towels"!
Great video. Very much appreciated. I am also immensely pleased to see that a composer of contemporary music like yourself (and for that matter: like myself) has a great admiration for Ludwig. As a colleague in the profession, I would like to add a thought of my own, if that is okay? When you say [13:43]: “One of the things that good music does is play with our expectations”. To be more specific: expectations within the conventions of the piece; indeed, not the clusters by the 2-year old toddler. From a technical point of view, playing tricks with our ears is mostly based on what I would call “musical ambiguity”, either within the rhythmic, melodic or harmonic framework. A simple example of harmonic ambiguity is the deceptive cadence, where the V is followed by VI instead of I. This classic knack works because the two chords have two of their three notes in common. If you only play those two notes (thus creating the ambiguous situation), the harmonic progression could go either way. Or e.g. the rhythmic ambiguity of a 3/4 time signature, which can be kicked into 6/8 ("America" from “West Side Story”) or even 12/16. The key word here is I think: “AMBIGUITY”. Keep making more inspiring videos! 🙂
What a great way to teach music theory! Really enjoying this. I hope there’s similar stuff on your channel or that you’ll do more videos like this going forward!
5:07 Hemiola does not refer to the polyrhythm of three against two or to any other polyrhythm. A hemiola maintains the rate of the pulse but changes the impression of the pulse temporarily by subdividing measures differently. For example, six-eight meter is a duple compound meter, but we can create a hemiola by accenting the first of every pair of eighth notes in a bar of six-eight, temporarily giving the impression of three-four meter. Hemiolas can span more than one bar. An example of a cross rhythm, by contrast, would be if I am simultaneously playing three notes evenly spaced and two notes evenly spaced, both groups having exactly the same duration. In this example, I would have to play the group of three 50% faster than the group of two to achieve a cross-rhythm. Hemiolas and cross rhythms are probably conflated or confused more often than anything in music theory, with the exception of atonal theory.
Interesting idea, but you should have picked a famous piece everyone heard a million times so people would immediately feel that there is something off with the sucky version but they can't really point their finger at it. This obscure piece everyone hears for the first time and you can't tell right away that something was taken away since you don't know what was there originally.
Fantastic video! This is something that I have personally done as well, although I tried my best (mere amateur), by composing a bagatelle entirely of my own but inspired by Beethoven and some Bach. When I was 18, about 11 years ago, I discovered this music and was dumbfounded by how it carried me on such an incredible journey. I seriously had never listened to a classical piece intentionally in my life. Shortly after this I bought a full weighted keys electric piano to play around and try to compose using GarageBand. I thought, what better way to understand and explore than to try and do it myself. What I discovered (after a decade of exploration) is how truly monumental Beethoven (and Bach) was. His music is so profoundly difficult to compose and achieve that level of dynamics, originality, style, and compelling quality. I think more musicians should be composing sonatas or purely instrumental music on the side of their other forms that they create, because being able to compose music in sonata form or any of these classical forms like the fugue should be a testament to the credibility of the artist at the very least as being disciplined in their craft, and potentially find new ways to expand their style organically. This concept you have explored in this video was extremely well done, and for sure has exceeded anything I could do in a timely manner. To compare how an average composer makes choices to Beethoven is a difficult task to convey clearly, as there aren't many good examples. So, attempting it yourself by directly comparing your recomposition to a piece he composed is excellent. An example you could explore next would be to attempt at composing a Diabelli variation and compare your attempt with some of the other notable composers attempts, and then explore how all of that differs from Beethoven's exploration of the theme in the 32 variations set. If you do that, I think you should attempt to make the most compelling variation you can and don't hold back! Also, liked and subscribed. Thank you for this!
Great video! Hard to imagine a sucky version of Ravel when what makes his work Ravellian is so intertwined with... everything. A sucky version of Rach would be interesting to show that his work isn't just a wide handspan.
I would definitely like to see more of these. Whether other composers, or maybe ones on Middle and Early period Beethoven, or one on his orchestral works or string quartets rather than piano sonati.
9:30 I could see where Chopin got this from for his B Major Sonata (the flourishing trill and the fioritura). Also making use of a similar chord progression. It’s in the same A BA like you mentioned here as well where B flows into A.
@@armine6766 I doubt we can meaningfully argue about taste and colour :) However, since you asked for it: to me, it often gives off an impression of "bland", "predictable", "boring", often building on simple melodies and harmonizations (not that those are by definition bad! just the ones Mozart wrote haha; In a similar music style I find I much prefer Haydn to Mozart... I know not everyone will agree and that's perfectly fine with me :D ) Because of that simplicity/transparency it is also surprisingly hard to play because one immediately hears any mistake. Some good Mozart pieces exist obviously, but the ones I like tend to be those pieces where Mozart (to me) doesn't sound very "classical" (like some parts of his first piano sonata, his ave verum corpus and his requiem). I honestly don' t get why Mozart is seen as this super genius to top all geniuses where the majority of his work doesn't appeal to me at all (in contrast to many other composers).
@@StefaanHimpealright thanks for your reply. i used to feel that way about mozart too. i preferred chopin or rachmaninoff or other romantic composers. but right now i like classical more. i actually like the angularity of it and i dont find it as predictable as others do. there are some good contrasting moments in mozarts music
Beethoven actually sucks to me. He gives me a headache, he is long-winded, can't write melodies or orchestrate, he is an emotional wreck, inconsistent, pompous, obsessive and the list goes on.
There is no a "better" one among them, they're simply different... As I've read somewhere, "Mozart created music which plays in the heaven, Beethoven created music which plays in the human soul. Both are equally great."
@@hjo4104 It's just that Beethoven is the composer who has the most moments when I ask myself "why?", like, why did he overcomplicate some things and left some things too simplistic.
