I salute you, member

@@davidecarlassara8525 **performs secret handshake**

@@matthiasm4299 What’s the password?

@@Richard.Atkinson Right, the password.... Uhhhmmmm, lemme see..... I think it was "Laus Josepho!" 😇 I hope that's correct 😬😬😬

Ahh yes. Greetings fellow members. Let us enjoy this masterpiece.

??? Underrated ??? He is pretty famous.

@@DanielFahimi Haydn is famous, not his works.

@@leonhardeuler6811 I agree! He is well-known but hardly anyone knows much of his music. Definitely underrated.

@@Richard.Atkinson Any suggestions where i should start with Haydn? Ive already listened to all his op 20 and op 33 quartets. Im probably going to see how many of his symphonies i can listen to in one day lol. Maybe then i can be inducted into the Haydn Fanatic Lodge haha.

@@leonhardeuler6811 I would suggest to continue listening to the quartets, then both oratorios, the 4 last piano sonatas, the f minor variations for piano, the Paris and London symphonies, the sinfonia concertante and trumpet concerto (truly amazing, especially with Stockhausen's cadenza) and the six last piano trios, I especially love E Major. The Sturm und Drang symphonies are superb too, I then personally love the piano Capriccio in G and Fantasia in C. Some very nice stuff is to be found in the masses.

It's so bluesy!

The ‘Father of…’ nonsense really needs dropping - its utter baloney. A father by definition must be in at the conception: regarding the symphony, one example will suffice. Haydn wrote his first symphony in 1757; Johann Stamitz - the most important composer of the first Mannheim school - *died* in 1757 having composed about 60 modern Classical symphonies, some with four movements including a Minuet, and some with clarinets. Need I go on…

@@elaineblackhurst1509 Yes, I prefer to call him the first great master of the string quartet.

That hiatus always prompts me to rewatch his past videos many times over; perhaps that was his plan.

So Mozart knew that J.S. Bach, whom he admired, was better than him? It makes sense to me.

@@aukej6024 There's no record of Mozart declaring the same of J.S. Bach.

@@landonmiller6943 Mozart didn't "know" Bach, he was at some point introduced to his scores and was like "oh shit", but I don't personally know if this had happened at the time he was praising Haydn. At any rate, he was most likely just referring to composers he had actually known in person, as it's well known that he admired Bach's music too.

@@SpaghettiToaster I know Mozart had access, through one of his wealthy patrons, to some of Bach's scores and had examined a manuscript copy of the Well-Tempered Clavier, I'm sure that made an impression. Mozart was notoriously brutal re his judgement regarding other composers (I'm the best, all the rest are mediocrities) so anyone he singled out for praise is interesting from that perspective. Just how aware composers were at the time of other composers' work is another interesting question in itself. Of course this is subjective, and I revere Bach's music as I do the works of Beethoven, Haydn and others, but for me, Mozart is the God of Music, the Universal Composer.

Mozart never recognized Joseph Haydn as his only equal. He was far more interested in Michael Haydn. I actually find Joseph Haydn very overrated in terms of harmony; handling dissonance. It never seemed very effective compared to Michael Haydn's. Take for example string quintet in G (composed in Salzburg, 1773 before the publication of Joseph Haydn's Op.20) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/b810q9Gh05vakmg.html Missa sancti Hieronymi (1777) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/icySqrGDsNu6gqM.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/icySqrGDsNu6gqM.html symphony in C (1784) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eraAe7icks29kps.html Joseph just sounds like a guy who got kicked out of his choir after his puberty and self-taught himself with Fux's book.

MIne too. I am not very fond of comic opera but Haydn's, at intervals, are superb. Better than Mozarts. But my opinion is influenced because I do not value the threatical aspect, of course.

The fugue in the fantasia movement of op. 76 no. 6 calls to mind op. 131.

It might be my favorite of his quartets, but there are so many other candidates (and not just from this opus!). Its finale will definitely be a future video.

Indeed, I can only imagine what the proposed complete set of six he intended for Op. 77 would've sounded like based on the two and a half he completed

It's such a great movement!

A lot of the joy i get from Bach's music is just by being impressed. I suggest you go to Richard's page and search for his videos on Bach. I also just like listening to melodic lines dance around each other which Bach was a master of.

Bach wrote a lot of very diverse music, maybe listen to some more variety and see what you like. I'm personally a big fan of his Brandenburg concertos and his violin concertos, for example. The reconstructed violin concerto from his harpsichord concerto is also an absolute banger in my opinion, there are some great recordings by Isabelle Faust.

No need to donate! You can support by sharing them!

Thank you for your many comments and responses to comments on my Haydn videos, that have also taught me things about Haydn!

I think they are also greater than Beethoven’s Op. 18 (which I also think are great)!

Very unpopular opinion, but I think the Op. 76-77 surpass every single Beethoven quartet.

@@davidecarlassara8525 I can't agree with that. I can understand Richard's assertion that they are greater than the Op. 18, which some consider somewhat overwrought or less than perfectly comfortable with their own structure (I have to admit that I personally love listening to them, as well as other early Beethoven chamber music, I think they have a fantastic energy and are just incredibly pleasant and exciting to hear). And they're also clearly not as crazy and experimental as these Haydn ones. On the other hand, I think his late quartets are some of, perhaps the most profound, transcendent, immediately touching yet technically masterful (and structurally ingenious) music there is, period. And as for the middle quartets, they represent essentially everything Haydn was so great at (except for the jokes perhaps?) pushed to absolute perfection. I think if Haydn could've heard Op. 59, he would've happily conceded this himself. As for Haydn's late ones, like this Quartet, I'd say they are most similar to Beethoven's late-middle style, so opp. 74 and 95, and I would consider those as (even) greater than these, although I really think that they're all pinnacles of quartet writing. Of course, that's just how I feel about them, and I think when we're talking about these greatest of works that basically anybody who knows them considers masterpieces, what's greater than what is a super personal matter. @Richard Atkinson On another note, have you considered making a video on either Medtner's piano concertos or his violin sonatas (2 and 3)? Both are monsters of motivic composition, among the best pieces in their respective genres and , much like the Haydn quartets, woefully underappreciated. If you like the Brahms symphonies and chamber pieces I'm sure you must love those as well?

@@SpaghettiToaster If i may add. op 59 has a lot of jokes and satire. My favorite example is the third movement of op 59 no 2: Beethoven, when commissioned to write op 59, was given some Russian Themes to base some movements on. There is a quote from one of Bach's sons that talk about how when Bach hears a subject he predicts what techniques the composer should put that subject through (stretto, inversion etc). In a very similar manner Beethoven noticed somehow that one of the themes could be formed into a 4 part canon. Instead of using this seriously like Bach would, Beethoven in the Allegretto of op 59 no 2 parodied student fugal exercises (you can actually find some of Beethoven's student exercises). He puts the theme in 2 bizarre fugues, a canon, and then another closer canon of some fragments of the theme.

I actually find Joseph Haydn very overrated in terms of harmony; handling dissonance. It never seemed very effective compared to Michael Haydn's. Take for example string quintet in G (composed in Salzburg, 1773 before the publication of Joseph Haydn's Op.20) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/b810q9Gh05vakmg.html Missa sancti Hieronymi (1777) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/icySqrGDsNu6gqM.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/icySqrGDsNu6gqM.html symphony in C (1784) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eraAe7icks29kps.html Joseph just sounds like a guy who got kicked out of his choir after his puberty and self-taught himself with Fux's book.

You don't understand how much I wish I could have this conversation!

Like Bruckner, my other favourite composer.

@@pepehaydn7039 So you can also use "Lalo Bruckner" as a user name.

@@pepehaydn7039 And Carl Nielsen, my other (other other other other) favorite composer!

No. Pepe does not come from “Papa”. “Pepe” is the familiar form we use in Spain for “José” (Joseph). The german equivalent is “Sepperl”, as Haydn was called ad home when a child.

@@pepehaydn7039 Lo sé muy bien, porque el español también es mi primer idioma. Por eso digo que también podrías llamarte Lalo (otro apelativo común en el español) Bruckner.

Yes, as much as I like the piano sonatas, the quartets are a whole different world.

I almost mentioned that one too, but it’s not quite as crazy as the ones I highlighted.

@@Richard.Atkinson It's a pretty funny coincidence too, as just days ago a friend of mine and I were messing around with English cadences and chords and passages that contain both 3rds. Naturally I brought this up as an example. And now that I've mentioned it, do you plan on ever doing a video on the English cadence?

Beethoven’s *counterpoint* lessons lasted on and off about 14 months from his arrival in Vienna in November 1792 until Haydn’s departure for his second visit to England in January 1794. Beethoven Opus 1 and Opus 2 were both published *after* the counterpoint lessons had finished, but you’re right they *precede* Opus 76. The question you pose is a fair one, but it’s almost entirely Haydn ‘influencing’ Beethoven - though I think Haydn had a go at writing scherzi in the Beethoven-style after hearing some of his first efforts.

Haven't seen the whole video yet, however, string players may default to different fingerings depending on what's written (raised 3rd finger on C# vs. lowered 4th finger on Db) C# - D# -C# can be played on the same string without shifting or switching strings. But that's just one possibility

I guess that because in those four bars we are going from Bb minor to B major, some enharmonic wizardry had to be applied, or else it would really come to a Cb major. The viola is the first instrument to start playing in the enharmonic key (A#m instead of Bbm), in the next bar the second violin joins (both playing B instead of Cb) and in the next bar 1st violin and cello join (all coming into a C#m instead of Dbm) and then continue to cadence together in B instead of Cb. That’s my hypothesis!

@@jordansmith6811 You never lower the 4th finger; if the 4th finger is on D then the third is on C#/Db and the second is on C (you'd extend the 4th to play a D#). Hence in a pure string score, I can imagine that the publisher would elect to respell some flats as sharps to better reflect the mechanics of string playing. Never seen it myself though.

@@juanferestrada Yes, that's right. It's simply that the enharmonic seam has to be crossed at some point, and since the four parts are being read independently, they don't all need to switch over to sharps at the same time. It pretty certainly is NOT an indication of subtly different pitches or of different fingering suggestions, even though those might come about as an accidental (ha) result.

@Richard Atkinson Sorry, i meant only the last entry in cello.

@@maciejkubera1536 Yes, I believe I know exactly what you're talking about: the 2nd movement of Mozart's K. 465 ("Dissonance") quartet (m. 75). Sorry for responding a year later!

@@Richard.Atkinson Yes, that's exactly, what I meant! Thank You for Your answer, I like Your videos very much, and it's great to chat with You any time!

Maybe someday!

Of course he is, but his harmony is notoriously hard to analyze, and his counterpoint is usually not strict and doesn't lend itself to the visualizations used in these videos (there would be overlapping colored boxes all over the place).

Haydn’s father was a wheelwright and is pretty irrelevant to anything related to this fine video.

@@elaineblackhurst1509 😅 I'm going to use this response from now on when people call him that!

@@Richard.Atkinson The other response of course is that Papa in Italian - the musical lingua franca of the age - means the Pope; papà is what Italian children call there father and is pronounced differently as indicated by the accent; Haydn was never made Pope!

Such as?

Haydn’s quartets are usually identified by their opus number, since they were published in groups. Also, since the Op. 1, 2, and 3 quartets are not considered true string quartets by many (including me) and Op. 3 was possibly not composed by Haydn, the Hoboken numbers are less useful for the quartets.

All my comments were offered before I heard the presenter's. comments. I've felt this way about 76 6 for years. Each time we play this I feel a sense of participation in a great composer's experimentation.

There's an embarrassment of riches to select from for sure.

Probably 466, 482, 488, 491, and 503?

@@Richard.Atkinson Daniel: asks what Richard's favorite concerto is Richard: names 20% of Mozart's piano concertos 😅 I completely agree with the selection, though - for me it's 466, 482 & 488

@@Richard.Atkinson Forgot 453...

@@matthiasm4299 Actually 17% to be precise.

The complete and utter lack of any credible evidence for any of its extraordinary supernatural claims. And also the vast amount of damage that superstitious and unscientific thought patterns have caused throughout human history.

@@Richard.Atkinson People of any persuasion may destroy. Something pretty significant should have occurred to have driven the people around Jesus to die for him. What is the alternative to disbelief? Afterlife in oblivion?

@@Richard.Atkinson I really enjoy your work by the way. Its inspired me in my own. Im an atheist to christian convert to be more clear. I believe we are likeminded in many things.

@@thekantor1964 "People of any persuasion may destroy." True, but some persuasions actively cause people to destroy, who wouldn't have otherwise destroyed. "Something pretty significant should have occurred to have driven the people around Jesus to die for him." The same can be said for every cult leader who has ever inspired people to commit suicide. It's certainly not evidence for any of the supernatural claims. "What is the alternative to disbelief? Afterlife in oblivion?" For me, life has greater purpose and more urgency without a belief in an afterlife. But even so, why believe in silly myths for which there is no evidence, just because it makes you feel better?

@@Richard.Atkinson "some persuasions actively cause people to destroy, who wouldn't have otherwise destroyed." I used to think this. The conclusion that I reached was that I threw a pretty hard ball to Christians. The printing press took in Europe because of the printing of the Bible - The reformation led to the translation of the bible into different European languages increasing literacy, and the proliferation of the printing press facilitated greater academic scholarship and scientific research. I cannot speak for or excuse the atrocities of men that have led to deaths as a result of ideological difference - but I think that deaths such as these can be found for any reason at all especially in the realm of politics. "The same can be said for every cult leader who has ever inspired people to commit suicide. It's certainly not evidence for any of the supernatural claims." I also used to struggle with this. Apart from Christianity, I rationalize my faith in this manner : There is or there isn't a creator. If there is a creator, and he has made an afterlife for us, do I deserve to go there based upon my works alone? I believe that I cant since no deed of mine could ever be traded for an eternity's worth of time. To resolve this bind, Christianity happens to offer an out in the savior. The evidence that I accept is the testimony of the individuals which reported the disappearance of Jesus' dead body from his Tomb, which was guarded by Jews with a keen interest in disproving false prophets. This, along with the recorded deaths of people who recanted their previous faith and had the conviction to die for this new one, is honestly sufficient for me. The fidelity of the recorded writings points to a very sudden and dramatic moment, which is a lot more than what other faiths can point towards as "evidence". I am happy with accepting something with less than acceptable evidence if it deals with something for which we will likely never have concrete evidence for (The "why" and "first cause" of existence). "For me, life has greater purpose and more urgency without a belief in an afterlife." I lived in terror as an unbeliever. Time is your only currency. I lived in timidity and in great fear of all things that could harm the hourglass I had left. I am in peace in my faith now, and from a utilitarian perspective, I live with great mental health and a lower blood pressure and have met many new friends who love beautiful and good things (as you do) in my Church. From a faith based perspective, I now believe I have an eternity ahead of me, where I will be with my good fellow Christians beside the creator in a paradise forever in the consort of angels.

You might be more interested in Michael Haydn, but Mozart certainly wasn’t 😅.

I’d say the quintet you posted is about on the level of Joseph Haydn’s Op. 1. Op. 20 is already far more interesting, and Op, 76 are some of the greatest compositions in the entire chamber music repertoire, so your comment is a little like posting on a video of Beethoven’s 9th Symphony that Johann Baptist Wenzel’s symphonies are much greater and that Beethoven was just some guy. 😅

@@Richard.Atkinson You mean you don't hear the chromaticism of the slow movement from Mozart's Jupiter symphony in that? Try: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eraAe7icks29kps.html Joseph Haydn is not very expressive with harmony and dissonance, hence he sounds pompous and happy all the time. It's why Berlioz, Schumann, Hanslick, etc criticized him (for being boring). Op.20 is pretty banal kzfaq.info/get/bejne/arObjaqnls7JoYk.html in terms of part-writing in many parts. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/arObjaqnls7JoYk.html it sounds like a student work. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/arObjaqnls7JoYk.html Try Michael Haydn's Requiem in C minor (a work Michael wrote when he was just 34), the music of a real master.

@@Richard.Atkinson I mean Joseph struggles a lot when writing counterpoint, and his use of non-chord tones is tamer and less harsh on the ear than Mozart and Michael Haydn's. It just doesn't have as much emotional range as theirs. But I'll give him some credit for the floating feel of Op.76 No.6 (something Schubert was also good at, but he wasn't a contrapuntist) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/brKlhquAqtnHgmw.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/p82Rntqr3MqsY5c.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/is1lnqmbr5mcdYU.html (composed in 1772)

@@pdqbach4552 Agree to completely disagree, vociferously! 😀

😈 Troll says what?

You’re comment simply proves the point that an opinion is a judgement not necessarily based on knowledge and understanding. You’ll learn.