This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
This article suggests a start date of 1750 and a finishing date of 1820. The Oxford Dictionary says roughly 1750 to 1830, however someone has been putting a start date of 1730 into related articles. Should we make all the articles consistent? How about using the Oxford dates unless we have good reason to adopt different dates? (I'm letting the Classical Music project know about this issue.) -- Klein zach 03:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
It naturally goes without saying that stylistic changes are not the immediate process that the 1750 start date makes it out to be, of course. Domenico Scarlatti's sonatas are in a style that could be described as proto-classical, after all. It is true that they do not yet display every characteristic of the Classical style, but even if we were to delineate the Classical period simply by the first and last masterpieces written in that style over a continuous period, it would have to start at 1777 with Mozart's KV 271 and end at 1828 with Schubert's D 960. Double sharp ( talk) 14:05, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
F.X.Brixi is "somehow" missing. He is (much) more "classical" than e.g. Boccherini and even Stamitz. He is clearly important in the transition phase from Baroque to core Classical, and he also paved the way for Mozart in Prague. IMHO, he should be mentioned before e.g. A.Soler (whom I do not know, in contrast to Brixi's - but that may be my Viennese education ...). --haraldmmueller 08:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
It seems to me that Albrechtsberger should be mentioned also - first as a teacher and friend to many important classical composers (Beethoven, of course), but then also as a composer of the transition period. His works are important as an example of that playful, experimenting time - standing out are of course his concertos for Jew's harp(!), mandora and orchestra. --haraldmmueller 08:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haraldmmueller ( talk • contribs)
There was a "close paraphrasing" warning in one section. A look at the results of the Duplication Detector report gave the following:
What happened is that the detector matched the huge list of links at the end of the article, especially the "Music" section, with something at Google - and voila, "hip hop music" and something else both turned up. Useless, therefore removed. -- User:Haraldmmueller 07:43, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Why is there a seperate chapter about how marginalized and neglected women were?
The truth is probably, like even today, that most great composers are male. Whether it's talent, emotional drive or ambition that is the cause of it is an interesting topic - for a neuroscientist and a psychologist.
The ideological narrative about how women are so neglected everywhere is feminist indoctrination, and has no place in an article like this. 129.240.71.197 ( talk) 11:14, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Whatever the reason might be, this section is very bad regardless. For one, the "role of women" in the classical period is not a synonym for "role of women composers." There were very many highly respected (and highly paid) women performers, primarily singers, and this section mentions none of them. A great number of upper class women in this time period were also very important in both performing music themselves, or patronizing it. Furthermore, the entire section conflates the "classical period" with classical music in general. (I really wish we could have called this time period of music the Neoclassical period.) The quotes by the scholar talk about the 19th century atmosphere of music- where symphonic works were seen as the most elevated form of music. However, many "intellectuals" in the real classical period (late 18th century, first two decades or so of the 19th century thought that large scale vocal music (oratorio, opera) was the most elevated form of music. Clara Schumann is a romantic composer. Also, one of the sources is a blog-like post "RVA News" which looks questionable at best and has numerous innacuracies, logical fallacies (meet in the middle fallacy) and misspellings. This entire section could be replaced with: "During the classical period, women did not generally compose large scale works." This is an encyclopedia, not an essay on the reasons for gender disparities. 96.236.221.120 ( talk) 17:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
The timpani, sometimes considered the "bass section of the brass (or trumpets)", should at least be mentioned. -- User:Haraldmmueller 07:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
I am quite sure that the classical period began in 1730 and ended in 1820. -- Mozart834428196 ( talk) 12:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Re the recent change commented "CPE Bach for instance composed in a Classical style well before 1750, and who the hell composed in a classical style after 1820?!":
It's always nice if people who have no references and sometimes also no real idea change things like that. CPE Bach's style can be called "a classical style" (an offspring of the galant style), that's ok. "who the hell" - Beethoven himself, who died in 1827; and then certainly Spohr, for example - he was seen as a successor to Beethoven at those times. -- User:Haraldmmueller 06:18, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
This article suggests a start date of 1750 and a finishing date of 1820. The Oxford Dictionary says roughly 1750 to 1830, however someone has been putting a start date of 1730 into related articles. Should we make all the articles consistent? How about using the Oxford dates unless we have good reason to adopt different dates? (I'm letting the Classical Music project know about this issue.) -- Klein zach 03:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
It naturally goes without saying that stylistic changes are not the immediate process that the 1750 start date makes it out to be, of course. Domenico Scarlatti's sonatas are in a style that could be described as proto-classical, after all. It is true that they do not yet display every characteristic of the Classical style, but even if we were to delineate the Classical period simply by the first and last masterpieces written in that style over a continuous period, it would have to start at 1777 with Mozart's KV 271 and end at 1828 with Schubert's D 960. Double sharp ( talk) 14:05, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
F.X.Brixi is "somehow" missing. He is (much) more "classical" than e.g. Boccherini and even Stamitz. He is clearly important in the transition phase from Baroque to core Classical, and he also paved the way for Mozart in Prague. IMHO, he should be mentioned before e.g. A.Soler (whom I do not know, in contrast to Brixi's - but that may be my Viennese education ...). --haraldmmueller 08:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
It seems to me that Albrechtsberger should be mentioned also - first as a teacher and friend to many important classical composers (Beethoven, of course), but then also as a composer of the transition period. His works are important as an example of that playful, experimenting time - standing out are of course his concertos for Jew's harp(!), mandora and orchestra. --haraldmmueller 08:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haraldmmueller ( talk • contribs)
There was a "close paraphrasing" warning in one section. A look at the results of the Duplication Detector report gave the following:
What happened is that the detector matched the huge list of links at the end of the article, especially the "Music" section, with something at Google - and voila, "hip hop music" and something else both turned up. Useless, therefore removed. -- User:Haraldmmueller 07:43, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Why is there a seperate chapter about how marginalized and neglected women were?
The truth is probably, like even today, that most great composers are male. Whether it's talent, emotional drive or ambition that is the cause of it is an interesting topic - for a neuroscientist and a psychologist.
The ideological narrative about how women are so neglected everywhere is feminist indoctrination, and has no place in an article like this. 129.240.71.197 ( talk) 11:14, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Whatever the reason might be, this section is very bad regardless. For one, the "role of women" in the classical period is not a synonym for "role of women composers." There were very many highly respected (and highly paid) women performers, primarily singers, and this section mentions none of them. A great number of upper class women in this time period were also very important in both performing music themselves, or patronizing it. Furthermore, the entire section conflates the "classical period" with classical music in general. (I really wish we could have called this time period of music the Neoclassical period.) The quotes by the scholar talk about the 19th century atmosphere of music- where symphonic works were seen as the most elevated form of music. However, many "intellectuals" in the real classical period (late 18th century, first two decades or so of the 19th century thought that large scale vocal music (oratorio, opera) was the most elevated form of music. Clara Schumann is a romantic composer. Also, one of the sources is a blog-like post "RVA News" which looks questionable at best and has numerous innacuracies, logical fallacies (meet in the middle fallacy) and misspellings. This entire section could be replaced with: "During the classical period, women did not generally compose large scale works." This is an encyclopedia, not an essay on the reasons for gender disparities. 96.236.221.120 ( talk) 17:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
The timpani, sometimes considered the "bass section of the brass (or trumpets)", should at least be mentioned. -- User:Haraldmmueller 07:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
I am quite sure that the classical period began in 1730 and ended in 1820. -- Mozart834428196 ( talk) 12:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Re the recent change commented "CPE Bach for instance composed in a Classical style well before 1750, and who the hell composed in a classical style after 1820?!":
It's always nice if people who have no references and sometimes also no real idea change things like that. CPE Bach's style can be called "a classical style" (an offspring of the galant style), that's ok. "who the hell" - Beethoven himself, who died in 1827; and then certainly Spohr, for example - he was seen as a successor to Beethoven at those times. -- User:Haraldmmueller 06:18, 6 August 2018 (UTC)