Is the Beethoven VC considered a Romantic one, or at least from 19th Century??
Though it was composed in 1806, I don't know if it qualifies, for instance, when you are required to play "A movement from a major concerto from the 19th and 20th centuries from the standard repertoire" or when it is specifically requested a "major Romantic one"; To have in consideration, the Paganini first VC was composed as early as in 1816, and I think it's considered Romantic. But, said "major Romantic" it's a bit subjetive, because sometimes it means the third big ones, Tchaikovsky, Sibelius and Brahms only, but other times it includes Bruch and Mendelssohn, or Schumann's and Elgar's, Dvorak, so it's a bit ambiguous.
Anyway, what do you think?
"major concerto" encompasses the standard concert-hall works, Bruch and Mendelssohn included.
I agree it is ambiguous, so to get rid of the guesswork it might be best to pose this question to the auditioning committee.
I think the Beethoven concerto would be the first of the Romantic Concertos.
I would call the Beethoven VC a classical work, although certainly it is one of Beethoven's most lyrical. On the one hand, if you listen to the other stuff that Beethoven wrote at about the same time (like the Razumovsky Quartets) I think you'd say comfortably that those are classical pieces. On the other hand, Beethoven is hard to pin down. He only wrote one VC and in that work you can hear a lot of musical exploration -- the gestation of Romanticism?
Razumovsky 2 totally classical?
Well, I think it's somewhat ambiguous because Beethoven himself was a hinge figure; although he has some Romantic sprinkles most of the time he's classical; in the VC the 3rd and 2nd movement are clearly classical, but the first with his unusual lenght has more room for some ideas tossed here and there. If you had to take, say, the last 3 violin sonatas, I think it would be even harder to tell, and sometimes I consider them as a wildcard for one or the other, but I don't really know.
Two points: For the specific question of the OP only the organizer of the audition in question is the only one who can deliver a useful response.
Yes, well said. As applied to music "romantic" is just a period, not a style. On the other hand the sea-change that came after WWI swept away musical romanticism (or "the style that evolved during the romantic period"!) leaving only a few survivors
Re Albrecht's comments - I would agree to some extent but I think it's slightly more complex than that. Charles Rosen (in his book 'The Classical Style') argues very convincingly that Beethoven's compositional methods were very much based on the classical principles exemplified by Haydn and Mozart, although with vast expansion of expressive power and timescale. So I would put Beethoven, including the VC, firmly in the Classical category.
If 'Romantic' suggests truly nothing in terms of style and refers only to dates, why would certain composers now and in the 20th Century bother using the term Neo-Romantic?
Addressing the audition question specifically, most people will tell you not to play the Beethoven for an audition. It's both an exceptionally exposed high-wire act and yet not really a showcase for your technique. The exception might be if you are an extraordinary player, but you would be better off with a true Romantic or post-Romantic era work.
Classical sounding but the cadenzas by Joachim and Kreisler sound Romantic to my ears. Beethoven’s own cadenza, for his piano arrangement, sounds more classical.
For whatever it's worth (which you may conclude is not much), my personal opinion is that when I not just listen to but deeply experience a truly exalted artistic masterpiece such as the Beethoven Violin Concerto, I do not hear an artistic "category," but rather the "voice" of a genius. What category or musical era it belongs in doesn't add much to my experiencing the music.
Classical with Romantic leanings? But the same could be said of mature Mozart..
Heavily depends on the context, no doubt.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.