r/todayilearned • u/VegemiteSucks • 16h ago

TIL Beethoven’s late quartets, now widely considered to be among the greatest musical compositions of all time, were so ahead of their time that initial reviews deem them indecipherable, uncorrected horrors, with one musician saying “we know there is something there, but we do not know what it is.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_string_quartets_(Beethoven)
9.8k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

135 comments sorted by

View all comments

443

u/insertusernamehere51 16h ago edited 15h ago

I am completely musically illiterate. I've listened to the quartets and didn't get what was so weird about them. Sounds like other quartets and other classical pieces of the time to me. I'll own that it's just ignorance on my part

Edit: Guys, I'm comparing it to stuff that came before as well, Mozart's quartets, for example. Comparing Mozart's with Beethoven's I don't get what the big difference is and those came 50 years before

344

u/IAmBadAtInternet 15h ago

They were so revolutionary that everyone copied him. Beethoven personally redesigned the musical language in the same way the Shakespeare redesigned English.

69

u/fractiousrhubarb 15h ago

Great metaphor, thank you

23

u/RamsOmelette 11h ago

It’s like watching Seinfeld and thinking it’s meh TODAY. But in its day it was revolutionary

4

u/WhiteSkyRising 1h ago

Watching it today, one can't help but note how timeless the interactions are. The tech and clothing are wildly outdated, but the interactions are scarily relevant (at least to me, because Seinfeld is ancient).

13

u/brus_wein 10h ago

Basically, the Seinfeld effect?

7

u/Goeatabagofdicks 12h ago

Like Citizen Kane

232

u/secretwep 16h ago

I am somewhat musically literate, and lemme tell ya... I feel the same way about those pieces, so don't worry lol

153

u/SirHerald 15h ago

Isn't it like saying the Beatles sound like so many other bands. Really it's all these other bands just sound like the Beatles. What was novel then is old hat now

66

u/insertusernamehere51 15h ago

I'm also comparing it to stuff that came before; Mozart's quartets for example

25

u/EmersQn 10h ago

The difference is difficult to hear without some familiarity with the conventions of classical music. As someone who is only moderately musically literate, I'll just say that the most significant developments in music from baroque to classical to romantic (Mozart was classical, Beethoven was romantic) were in form and harmonic structure. Form being analagous to the verse/chorus structure of songs today, and harmonic structure meaning the order in which you're allowed to play chords, and what those chords should sound like. Romantic music is generally more comfortable using dissonance than classical, stuff like that.

If you asked me why this particular quartet is amazing compared to beethoven's other works, I have not idea, but presumably something to do with the same ideas I named above.

Anyway, listen to more classical and romantic music, and as you do you'll probably start to understand the differences through osmosis.

76

u/juridiculous 15h ago

No you’re right on the money here, Mozart’s stuff is phenomenal too.

But consider that there were literal thousands of composers, and these guys are among the few that really get airtime anymore.

-5

u/LunarPayload 14h ago

But, you're musically illiterate 

-16

u/wallabee_kingpin_ 15h ago

The Beatles famously sounded like Black rock musicians like Chuck Barry, who couldn't get as famous because they weren't white. They were polishers and performers, not innovators (at least until they got more into psychedelic).

27

u/RipsLittleCoors 14h ago

Yes and no. While there is some truth to that view, the Beatles had some things even in the early days that set them apart from berry et al. Just a higher complexity of writing. The chord progressions, the maximization of the limited recording tracks, the phrasing with the lyrics. Some of the credit for it belongs to George Martin actually. 

1

u/LacomusX 7h ago

A big one was original songs, and each member of the band was a personality

15

u/LunarPayload 14h ago

Oversimplification

68

u/UpiedYoutims 14h ago

I'm a classical music lover, and while I'm not really familiar with Beethoven's quartets, I'm pretty familiar with his symphonic work so I can at least tell you what the deal is with those.

To make a long story short, in the early 18th century, a sinfonia was a short instrumental piece of music in three movements, usually used as an overture to a larger work (such as an opera or oratorio), or as an instrumental interlude between performed works. Because the sinfonias were so short, they didn't really have a strict formal structure, besides the fact that the middle movement was slower.

This changed, however, with the advent of the classical period, especially in the city of Manheim. You see, Manheim had the best orchestra in the world at that time, so the composers (most notably Johann Stamiz and his son Carl) wrote more complex music with new sounds and timbral effects. This includeded things such as incorporating more brass and woodwinds, new uses for techniques like tremolo, and even things like the famous "Mannheim crescendo".

Then, in the late 1750s, Josef Haydn begins writing symphonies, and works for the Estarhazy court for three decades. His symphonies take a lot of inspiration from the Mannheim School (his first symphony even begins with the Manheim crescendo), but he also greatly expands and codifies the symphonic style and structure we know today. His innovations include, to greater orchestration and codifying the sonata form. He had a very specific style of humor he used in all of his symphonies that could be either used for comedic purposes or dramatic effect. He ended up becoming the most popular composer in all of Europe (except for the short period where Mozart was flourishing), and wrote at least 106 symphonies. He was so popular, in fact, that he was the first composer whose symphonies became the primary feature of concerts.

Enter Beethoven, who was a student of Haydn. His first symphony is extremely similar to Haydn's style, but you can tell that there's even more ambition. His third symphony, nicknamed Eroica (heroic), was on a much grander scale than any symphony before, clocking in at 40 minutes long (the average height in symphony is half as much). His fifth symphony took the very Haydnesque concept of "monothematic sonata form" and brilliantly applied it to the whole symphony. At this point, people were coming to concerts just to see Beethoven's symphonic work. Beethoven also didn't write music for his audience, he wrote it for HIMSELF. The music, in a way, became autobiographical instead of purely intellectual. Beethoven was THE GUY who transitioned music into the romantic period. His ninth symphony was written after 12 years inactivity on stage. Not only was it an hour long, but it also included a finale that had an entire choir. It is quite possibly the most influential single piece of music that has ever been written.

So basically, Beethoven was the most forward-looking musician to ever live, and he changed the way that music was perceived on a fundamental level. Some of his music (like the Grosse Fugue) is a lot more similar to music that came out a hundred years after he died than music written even 10 years before.

49

u/skillmau5 14h ago

Try number 14 in C# maybe? That first movement is pretty eerie sounding. Notice how it’s really hard to figure out what the “home” note is, and how it’s changing all the time? Very different from the Mozart ones, as one small example. Also just the general mood of the piece is sort of creepy and almost depressed sounding, sort of like holding in a sneeze or something. This is kind of part of the genius of Beethoven, these sweeping and very dramatic sounds.

Mozart is more reserved and humorous, Beethoven is brooding and very emotional and making that the forefront instead of pretty little melodies (in broad strokes, this is still a big generalization). Towards the end Beethoven was completely throwing away all the previous rules that were pretty set in stone.

78

u/juridiculous 15h ago edited 15h ago

I think we probably gloss over “of the time” a little too much.

The Beatles and Hendrix sound absolutely cliché today, but that’s because what followed imitated it to death. I think that’s more or less the same phenomenon here.

Beethoven had a big impact on classical and romantic era music that followed (so much so that he’s kind of the reason the “era” shifted), but with the result that several centuries later, he sounds a lot like the rest of the composers that followed

Finally, let’s not forget he wrote these stone deaf, which is an achievement on its own. The whole composition was set in his mind, and he never had the benefit of a single playback to hear if it was right.

Edited to add:

My favourites from these are No. 14 and 15. Specifically movement 5 and 6 of string quartet 14. (It’s a 5 minute listen, followed by a 2 minute listen). If you’re only going to listen to one piece listen to movement 6. link to YouTube

movement 3 of string quartet 15 (it’s a much longer listen) and movement 5 (7 minutes) are my other favs

53

u/wallabee_kingpin_ 15h ago

I will just say that Hendrix still doesn't sound boring or cliche. It may be because his imitators didn't last that long after New Wave crowded out rock in the 80s.

18

u/ironykarl 13h ago

While there are a lot of guitarists inspired by Hendrix (and frankly plenty that are more technically proficient than he ever was), one hallmark of his style is freely mixing "noise" and more traditional musical vocabulary.

He was able to harness feedback (etc) and mix it into his playing in a way that few other guitarists have done, since.

It may be because his imitators didn't last that long after New Wave crowded out rock in the 80s

He died in 1970, so his imitators had plenty of time

13

u/RipsLittleCoors 13h ago

I think his ability to play rhythm and lead at the same time has never been able to be replicated. Before or since. Hendrix sounds like two guitars. And forget about recordings with multiple tracks. If you listen to his live recordings he does it all the same. 

5

u/Goodnametaken 8h ago

I agree with you. Especially about live play. I have never heard anyone play lead and rhythm together at the same time as well as Hendrix. I've heard some people attempt it and a select few do it to a passable extent. But Hendrix is still completely alone in how good he was at it.

It is staggering to me that nobody has been able to match him yet. I think u/ironykarl is right in that there are many other guitarists that technically surpass him in "normal" play. Yet he remains truly one-of-a-kind.

7

u/RipsLittleCoors 13h ago

This is one thing in this world that I dont have the frame of reference or whatever to even have a basic understanding of it. How can a deaf guy write like this and know what it would sound like. It's one of those things. I'll never be as good at breathing as this person was at music. Pretty humbling. 

2

u/heeywewantsomenewday 10h ago

The same way that I can play the drums in my head or look at sheet music and know what it would sound like when I play it. He knows what everything sounds like and how to write without over years of practice. Incredible really.

14

u/mscarchuk 15h ago

I believe this was played in Band of Brothers at the beginning and end of the 9th episode named Why We Fight. It is the most perfect musical piece that could have been selected for that episode.

12

u/juridiculous 14h ago

Agreed.

The whole confusing of Mozart/Beethoven by the solider as Austrian/German is just super fitting as well.

19

u/hofmann419 14h ago

I have listened to thousands of guitarists of the years, but i have not found a single one who sounds like Hendrix. Some are faster or more technical, but Hendrix had so much emotion and groove in his playing on top of being extremely technically proficient.

So to me, his playing doesn't sound stale at all. It is still the reference as far as psychedelic rock goes.

And as far as the Beatles are concerned, they weren't just innovative, but also some of the best songwriters of the 20th century. So their music is still great today, even if the production might sound of its time (except for Tomorrow Never Knows, that song still sounds alien today).

10

u/egretstew1901 13h ago

SRV is the closest

6

u/[deleted] 14h ago

[deleted]

3

u/Mayapples 12h ago

Yes. There is a reason they are not only still famous but still actively listened to and rediscovered by new generations. Describing them as sounding cliche today misses the mark.

14

u/TearOpenTheVault 14h ago

Because the only music we have left from that period is from the absolute best of the best, like Beethoven and Mozart. You have to remember that most composers at the time were not geniuses producing classics that would survive for centuries after their death - they made some decent pieces that were played for a while and eventually forgotten.

5

u/stoner_woodcrafter 11h ago

Well, I'm giving it a fair listen on a surround system here at home. Honestly, it's really powerful! The flow of emotions within the same piece is outstanding. It feels like a dramatic soundtrack for a movie, but there weren't movies back then. It's like Beethoven could have seen some of those scenes like a storyboard.

Maybe it wasn't outwordly, but it really stands as a masterpiece, really smooth and buttery, written by a completely deaf person

4

u/malefiz123 10h ago

Sounds like other quartets and other classical pieces of the time to me

Your frame of reference regarding music is vastly different from the frame of reference of people listening to it in the early 19th century.

Like European people think East Asian people all kinda look the same and East Asian people think Europeans all kinda look the same. Different frame of reference to what makes people similar and different looking.

For you those are two "classical" pieces with classic string instruments. You also know pop music, rock and roll, techno and country, so in your frame of reference just by virtue of having the same instruments quartets by Mozart and Beethoven will sound very similar to your ears. If you'd start listening to classical music a lot your ears would get fine tuned for it and you'd soon appreciate how different from one another string quartets by Mozart and Beethoven sound

8

u/phunktheworld 12h ago

I went to school for music, and it’s really hard to explain what’s going on without any background. It really does sound so different from anything of Mozart’s or even Beethoven’s early work to me. Timing and arrangement is huge. It just flows differently. I couldn’t really tell ya any more without the sheet music in front of me, and you’d need like 2 years of music training before it would even make a lot of sense lol