A Beethoven Scherzo

"Here is my answer. You are right, dear student: it is marked Minuet (or Minuetto), but in fact it is a Scherzo, because it is a much faster triple meter; this is one of Beethoven's structural innovations compared to the Symphonies of the 1700s. In fact, it beats in one, meaning: there are three movements per measure, but the speed of the piece leads to only one pulse per measure."

I would take a look at the 32 sonatas, as the first signs of change are already there...

...anyway, in the first symphony Beethoven is still a victim of Haydn; practically, not knowing the author a priori could easily be attributed to his master.

Ettore wrote:

I would take a glance back at the 32 sonatas, for even there are the first signs of change...

Well, the First Symphony is op. 21; of the piano sonatas, before that symphony, he had written only ten...

I don't know where you are going with this Carlos, I am simply inviting you to look at the sonatas and symphonies in parallel. Since I think that the pf was a testing ground for Beethoven (but not only), it is easy that (obviously not in the 32nd) there are innovative traces in terms of Scherzo/Minuet.

It seems to me that we have focused on Beethoven's first period, from 1782 to 1802

Dating from his years in Bonn to his early years in Vienna, the following compositions are featured: the first two symphonies, 20 piano sonatas, six string quartets, trios for piano, violin and cello, 8 sonatas for violin and piano, and the first 3 concertos for piano and orchestra.

Given this, in this period the need to expand formal structures and enlarge compositional proportions is evident; he also skillfully develops composition for the violin, to which he entrusts brilliant passages with double, triple stops, etc., and assigns the same importance to both the piano and the violin (see the sonata in F major op. 24 "Spring" for its lyrical/sentimental vein, the sonata in C minor op. 30 no. 2 for its dark and heroic tone). Beethoven's compositional development is extraordinary, as demonstrated by the 32 piano sonatas created from 1795 to 1822—pieces that present expressive, compositional, and technical innovations also favored by the refinement of the instrument's mechanics. The first piano sonatas approach the formal models of Haydn, Mozart, and Clementi, although rich, brilliant sonorities and great thematic expansion are already perceptible with the addition of a fourth movement, a minuet or scherzo.

Someone was speaking of Haydn; the string quartets and piano op. 18, published in 1801, are influenced by Haydn, even though some formal solutions are already present, such as final movements written in sonata form or sonata-rondo form. The first symphony in C major op. 21 was written at age 30 and follows the formal model already adopted by Haydn and Mozart, although the novelty Beethoven introduces is given by the exploitation of technical and expressive resources in all orchestral sections and also by the broken style of the melody that runs between the different instruments of the orchestra.

Ettore wrote:

I don't know where you are going with this Carlos, I am simply inviting you to look at the sonatas and symphonies in parallel. Since I think that the pf was a testing ground for Beethoven (but not only), it is easy that (obviously not in the 32nd) there are innovative traces in terms of Scherzo/Minuet.

Surely the piano was the testing ground for Beethoven; the Symphonies presuppose the experience of the Sonatas, throughout their entire creative arc.

I also agree with highlighting Haydn's fundamental contribution to the composer's formation.

Ettore wrote:

I don't know where you're going with this Carlos, I was simply inviting [you] to look at the sonatas and symphonies in parallel. Since I think that the pf was a testing ground for Beethoven (but not only), it is easy that (obviously not in the 32nd) there are innovative traces in terms of Scherzo/Minuet.

Well, I don't believe that the piano was the "testing ground" for Beethoven, considering that among the most extraordinarily innovative things in his production are the Ninth Symphony and the last string quartets... Beethoven was not Brahms, for whom, certainly, the piano always represented a mandatory step before any other compositional experience. In any case, I simply wanted to "get at" the fact that your advice to "take a look at the 32 sonatas," because "already there are the first signs of change..." seemed poorly expressed to me. I would have said that even in the early sonatas (as in the Op. 18 Quartets, moreover) these signs of change are present. That was what my clarification regarding the opus number was due to...

I agree with Carlos, as Frank explained well, the pf was itself an instrument that still needed to be tested... and B. and Clementi really went for it.

This does not change the fact that the sonata Op 14 no. 1 of 1798-99 presents, for example, an allegretto with the dynamics of a Minuet

Dino wrote:

This does not change the fact that the Sonata Op 14 no. 1 of 1798-99 presents, for example, an allegretto with the dynamics of a Minuet

Finally someone who went to get these sonatas... Dino, a testing ground not in a "timbral" sense but as a means to try and demonstrate his ideas which are inevitably found also in the symphonies.

Carlos wrote:

among the most extraordinarily innovative things in his production are the Ninth Symphony and the last string quartets...

and the late sonatas, having surpassed the sonata form, the great fugue.......

Ettore wrote:

Finally someone who went to get these sonatas...

Ah, because you think nobody here knows them except for you?

Ettore wrote:

and the late sonatas, having surpassed sonata form, the great fugue...

Let's try to understand Italian: I said that "among" the most innovative things are the Ninth and the late Quartets (which in my opinion are the true ground where Beethoven experimented... all of them, not just the last ones). But if you want me to agree with you, I will, it doesn't really matter much to me anyway...

Carlos wrote:

But if you want me to agree with you, I will, it doesn't matter much to me...

... more than anything it was to "justify myself"

maestrosfredda wrote:

I also agree on highlighting Haydn's fundamental contribution to the composer's formation.

...and Salieri...?

Shark wrote:

...and Salieri...?

I think that a master like Salieri, who had many prestigious pupils, must have influenced at least to some extent... it is true that we are talking about pupils who were great artistic minds, but it seems incredible to me to think the contrary. In short, it is difficult not to take into account how much you are taught ... then you walk on your own two feet, but those feet rest on the layer of training that we/they have (precisely) received from someone.