What do you think?
Rate this book
The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven
A detailed analysis of the musical styles and forms developed by Mozart, Hadyn, and Beethoven
467 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1971
124 people are currently reading
4865 people want to read
About the author
Charles Rosen
56 books54 followersCharles Rosen was a concert pianist, Professor of Music and Social Thought at the University of Chicago, and the author of numerous books, including The Classical Style, The Romantic Generation, and Freedom and the Arts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews
August 24, 2023
DNF Page 98
A brilliant book in every way and one I plan on returning to in future but I can't fool myself any longer, it's simply too advanced for me theoretically. I'm hesitant even now to put it down as I am still enjoying it considerably but I'm only at probably a 60-70% level of understanding and I think Rosen deserves better than that. With sadness I place it back in the bookshelf to be resumed at a later date...
A brilliant book in every way and one I plan on returning to in future but I can't fool myself any longer, it's simply too advanced for me theoretically. I'm hesitant even now to put it down as I am still enjoying it considerably but I'm only at probably a 60-70% level of understanding and I think Rosen deserves better than that. With sadness I place it back in the bookshelf to be resumed at a later date...
May 14, 2009
Charles Rosen is one of the great musicologists of the twentieth century and in The Classical Style he does a marvelous job characterizing the classical style as epitomized by its three great masters, Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.
Of all the formal principles that have defined any period, the elements of classical style are perhaps most amenable to formal analysis. The classical period is principally characterized by sonata form and tonality. We can agree with Sir Donald Tovey that we do violence to compositions by interpreting them as if sonata form constitutes a set of binding rules rather than a post-facto abstraction of what the masters of the classical period actually did. Nonetheless, the principles of tonality may be expressed with an intellectual clarity which is more elusive when characterizing, say, a canon or polyphonic mass.
This is a reflection of the ideals of the classical period, whose audiences delighted in elegance and structural economy. Classical composers highlighted the structural contours defining works by emphasizing modulation and calling attention sectional boundaries with an intensified emphasis cadence. Elegance of structure was taken by the classical masters as an end in itself, and their harmonies glide on a framework they trace and enact. That is in itself a large part of the game of classical composition.
An understanding of the classical period is not only relatively easy to acquire, but of central importance to understanding nearly all subsequent composition. With the arguable exceptions of minimalism and some wings of the avant garde, nearly every important composition in the Occident since Haydn is either tonal or a reaction against tonality. Tonal harmony is the very foundation of our music theory to this day, and understanding its history and development can open up a deeper understanding of everything from Verdi to Schoenberg to Robert Johnson to Kylie Minogue.
Rosen makes all of this remarkably evident and comprehensible in dazzling prose that astonishes the reader with his insight on every page. I'm not a musicologist and browsed through a lot of the close passage analysis that comprises a big chunk of the book, but I still got my money's worth many times over.
Of all the formal principles that have defined any period, the elements of classical style are perhaps most amenable to formal analysis. The classical period is principally characterized by sonata form and tonality. We can agree with Sir Donald Tovey that we do violence to compositions by interpreting them as if sonata form constitutes a set of binding rules rather than a post-facto abstraction of what the masters of the classical period actually did. Nonetheless, the principles of tonality may be expressed with an intellectual clarity which is more elusive when characterizing, say, a canon or polyphonic mass.
This is a reflection of the ideals of the classical period, whose audiences delighted in elegance and structural economy. Classical composers highlighted the structural contours defining works by emphasizing modulation and calling attention sectional boundaries with an intensified emphasis cadence. Elegance of structure was taken by the classical masters as an end in itself, and their harmonies glide on a framework they trace and enact. That is in itself a large part of the game of classical composition.
An understanding of the classical period is not only relatively easy to acquire, but of central importance to understanding nearly all subsequent composition. With the arguable exceptions of minimalism and some wings of the avant garde, nearly every important composition in the Occident since Haydn is either tonal or a reaction against tonality. Tonal harmony is the very foundation of our music theory to this day, and understanding its history and development can open up a deeper understanding of everything from Verdi to Schoenberg to Robert Johnson to Kylie Minogue.
Rosen makes all of this remarkably evident and comprehensible in dazzling prose that astonishes the reader with his insight on every page. I'm not a musicologist and browsed through a lot of the close passage analysis that comprises a big chunk of the book, but I still got my money's worth many times over.
June 18, 2012
Originally published on my blog here in January 2000.
One of the best known works on classical music (in the wider sense as well as the narrower one of the title) written in the second half of this century, The Classical Style has been re-issued in a new edition. Considering what has happened in the last thirty years, remarkably little has been changed; this is partly because Rosen felt (as he says in the foreword) that to revise it would mean a complete rewrite, as the book he would write today would be very different. The changes consist mainly of a new foreword and the addition of new footnotes in response to suggestions and criticisms made about the original edition.
The aim of the book is to look for the distinguishing features of the classical style, the music of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Rosen concentrates exclusively on the three composers acknowledged then and now as its greatest exponents: Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven. He analyses large numbers of works by these composers, to see how the style developed - all three were innovators. The coverage of Beethoven is rather more sketchy than of the earlier composers, concentrating mainly on the works for piano.
What is it that marks out the classical style? Most musicians would probably tell you that it is a meticulous adherence to form, especially sonata form, with set modulations occurring at particular points in movements to lead up to the final resolution onto the tonic for the end of the movement. They would perhaps say that his form was developed by the sons of J.S. Bach and by Haydn, and that its gradual breakdown which was to lead to the romantic style was begun by Beethoven.
To ascribe to the late eighteenth century a rigorous use of schemes not in fact formalised until the mid nineteenth is a ridiculous idea, soon exploded by seeing how frequently Haydn and Mozart fail to conform to the strict dictates of sonata form: the wrong number of themes, the wrong keys, tricks to deceive the ear into thinking the end is approaching, and so on. Instead, Rosen examines hundreds of examples to build up a picture of what these three composers actually did.
From a harmonic point of view, the crucial development, he thinks, was that of equal temperament earlier in the century. This means that instead of one key on a keyboard being exactly in tune and the rest out to one degree or another (making distant keys almost unusable), all keys are equally nearly in tune. This strengthened the relationships between keys, and made the triad the dominant harmonic feature. Earlier harmony was based on the interactions of more or less independent lines of melody, as in a Bach fugue. Bringing in simpler, symmetrical rhythms, as were used in opera buffa, meant that this new type of harmony could be exploited on a large scale, treating modulations as slowly moving dissonances. The ideas which were later codified as sonata form are basically to travel to the dominant as a source of tension, then resolve back to the tonic, and can be seen in many classical movements which it would seem strange to classify as sonata form - slow movements, minuets, rondos. Increasing chromaticism and the tendency to treat all keys as harmonies rather than long term dissonances led to the break up of the classical and the establishment of the romantic style, with longer melodies not lending themselves to the kind of harmonisation fundamental to Beethoven, Haydn and Mozart.
Rosen places the first flowering of the style in Haydn's string quartet set, Op. 33, slightly later than would many historians (but then his definition of the style is slightly different, too). He points to the extra-musical evidence that Haydn described these quartets as new and revolutionary. This is usually dismissed as marketing, but it is impossible to deny that they marked at least a change in Haydn's own style. Rosen points to relatively minor composers such as Hummel for the beginnings of the end, classifying Beethoven as more old fashioned than revolutionary. His works were unprecedented in scale, but reactionary in form, particularly his late works which sought to integrate sonata form with the even more outdated fugue.
In some ways, The Classical Style is too overwhelming to be easily assessed. The vast array of analyses of individual works are convincing, though necessarily sketchy. To summarise a thirty minute work in three pages is a difficult task which Rosen handles superbly, aided by the large numbers of quotations he is able to include. Few amateur musicians would have extensive enough music collections, let alone scores, to check what he has to say in detail or to look for counter examples to his arguments among more obscure works by lesser composers. The book is however hailed as a classic, and the points that have been raised between the editions seem to Rosen only to require minor consideration, and so I suspect that his argument is valid. It would hardly seem worth doubting it, except that I wanted to point out that it would be beyond the means of most amateur musicians, myself included, to properly evaluate it.
One of the best known works on classical music (in the wider sense as well as the narrower one of the title) written in the second half of this century, The Classical Style has been re-issued in a new edition. Considering what has happened in the last thirty years, remarkably little has been changed; this is partly because Rosen felt (as he says in the foreword) that to revise it would mean a complete rewrite, as the book he would write today would be very different. The changes consist mainly of a new foreword and the addition of new footnotes in response to suggestions and criticisms made about the original edition.
The aim of the book is to look for the distinguishing features of the classical style, the music of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Rosen concentrates exclusively on the three composers acknowledged then and now as its greatest exponents: Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven. He analyses large numbers of works by these composers, to see how the style developed - all three were innovators. The coverage of Beethoven is rather more sketchy than of the earlier composers, concentrating mainly on the works for piano.
What is it that marks out the classical style? Most musicians would probably tell you that it is a meticulous adherence to form, especially sonata form, with set modulations occurring at particular points in movements to lead up to the final resolution onto the tonic for the end of the movement. They would perhaps say that his form was developed by the sons of J.S. Bach and by Haydn, and that its gradual breakdown which was to lead to the romantic style was begun by Beethoven.
To ascribe to the late eighteenth century a rigorous use of schemes not in fact formalised until the mid nineteenth is a ridiculous idea, soon exploded by seeing how frequently Haydn and Mozart fail to conform to the strict dictates of sonata form: the wrong number of themes, the wrong keys, tricks to deceive the ear into thinking the end is approaching, and so on. Instead, Rosen examines hundreds of examples to build up a picture of what these three composers actually did.
From a harmonic point of view, the crucial development, he thinks, was that of equal temperament earlier in the century. This means that instead of one key on a keyboard being exactly in tune and the rest out to one degree or another (making distant keys almost unusable), all keys are equally nearly in tune. This strengthened the relationships between keys, and made the triad the dominant harmonic feature. Earlier harmony was based on the interactions of more or less independent lines of melody, as in a Bach fugue. Bringing in simpler, symmetrical rhythms, as were used in opera buffa, meant that this new type of harmony could be exploited on a large scale, treating modulations as slowly moving dissonances. The ideas which were later codified as sonata form are basically to travel to the dominant as a source of tension, then resolve back to the tonic, and can be seen in many classical movements which it would seem strange to classify as sonata form - slow movements, minuets, rondos. Increasing chromaticism and the tendency to treat all keys as harmonies rather than long term dissonances led to the break up of the classical and the establishment of the romantic style, with longer melodies not lending themselves to the kind of harmonisation fundamental to Beethoven, Haydn and Mozart.
Rosen places the first flowering of the style in Haydn's string quartet set, Op. 33, slightly later than would many historians (but then his definition of the style is slightly different, too). He points to the extra-musical evidence that Haydn described these quartets as new and revolutionary. This is usually dismissed as marketing, but it is impossible to deny that they marked at least a change in Haydn's own style. Rosen points to relatively minor composers such as Hummel for the beginnings of the end, classifying Beethoven as more old fashioned than revolutionary. His works were unprecedented in scale, but reactionary in form, particularly his late works which sought to integrate sonata form with the even more outdated fugue.
In some ways, The Classical Style is too overwhelming to be easily assessed. The vast array of analyses of individual works are convincing, though necessarily sketchy. To summarise a thirty minute work in three pages is a difficult task which Rosen handles superbly, aided by the large numbers of quotations he is able to include. Few amateur musicians would have extensive enough music collections, let alone scores, to check what he has to say in detail or to look for counter examples to his arguments among more obscure works by lesser composers. The book is however hailed as a classic, and the points that have been raised between the editions seem to Rosen only to require minor consideration, and so I suspect that his argument is valid. It would hardly seem worth doubting it, except that I wanted to point out that it would be beyond the means of most amateur musicians, myself included, to properly evaluate it.
February 22, 2019
This was an absolutely fantastic read. Rosen’s depth of knowledge and enthusiasm for his subject(s) truly engaged this reader as he deftly put into words some of the more magical and mysterious elements of the great music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.
Rosen’s material covered very few biographical details. He focuses entirely on the inherent value each piece of music had. While it was impossible to cover the pieces of these masters comprehensively, his observations did provide an in-depth look at how they fit into the classical scheme. Rosen perfectly captured the classical paradigm that all three masters worked with and how they each managed to make it their own.
He also corrects the historical idea that there were classical “rules” that each composer “broke”. Each work “provides its own expectations, disappoints and finally fulfills them…..In other words, such rules as the classical style genuinely developed-the need for resolution, the sense of proportion and of a closed and framed pattern-are never broken at all.”
And yet, I wondered as I read. Rosen obviously had a meticulous grasp of the musical language of this time. However, as he mentions Mozart’s Concerto in D major K. 451, he observes how conventional the entire piece was, and yet Mozart was proud of this work. It is worth noting that as close as we can come to understanding the classical style there are still gaps, but this is an excellent spot on the journey.
Rosen’s material covered very few biographical details. He focuses entirely on the inherent value each piece of music had. While it was impossible to cover the pieces of these masters comprehensively, his observations did provide an in-depth look at how they fit into the classical scheme. Rosen perfectly captured the classical paradigm that all three masters worked with and how they each managed to make it their own.
He also corrects the historical idea that there were classical “rules” that each composer “broke”. Each work “provides its own expectations, disappoints and finally fulfills them…..In other words, such rules as the classical style genuinely developed-the need for resolution, the sense of proportion and of a closed and framed pattern-are never broken at all.”
And yet, I wondered as I read. Rosen obviously had a meticulous grasp of the musical language of this time. However, as he mentions Mozart’s Concerto in D major K. 451, he observes how conventional the entire piece was, and yet Mozart was proud of this work. It is worth noting that as close as we can come to understanding the classical style there are still gaps, but this is an excellent spot on the journey.
July 4, 2019
A classic about the classical style in classical music. Nice prose, combines technical analysis with musical insight well. Already tempted to reread it
Read
August 8, 2021I don’t have the requisite musical knowledge to either rate or fully appreciate this work, but I was able to listen to the works discussed, which was most enjoyable, and I think I appreciate them even more as result of trying to read and understand this book. My devotion to all Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven has increased, expanded, and deepened.
April 4, 2010
This book was brilliant! I highly recommend it to all musicians. Charles Rosen is an amazing musicologist. Not only does he have a lot of insight into music, but he is able to express himself with a great deal of intelligence and clarity. His understanding of the classical style is inedible. From this book I have gained a better understanding not only of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven, but also of music in general. I now know why these three composers are considered to be among the greatest. In addition, my whole understanding of sonata form is much deeper and complete than ever before. In fact, my sense of musical structure has been greatly enriched. Reading this book is pretty much the equivalent of a really good advanced college music course, without being too obscure or esoteric for anyone who can read music and has a decent grasp of basic tonal harmony. I just can't say enough good things about this book.
July 11, 2015
Truly mind expanding. A book I have gone back to again and again - partly because I didn't fully understand it the first time that I read it. Rosen makes academic musicology accessible to those who are curious but untutored, however you do have to put the book down sometimes to let you brain have a rest. On occasions, as when writing about the pastoral style in Haydn's symphonies, he can become quite poetic. I wish he would write about what the music might be expressing a little more often rather than just tonic - dominant technicalities, but still a magisterial opus.
February 1, 2021
This magnificent book, revered by critics, musicians, and general readers alike, is recommended by Jonathan Biss in his wonderful (and free!) Coursera survey of the Beethoven piano sonatas. Jeremy Denk, another indispensable pianist, has said The Classical Style “reads like a thriller,” and indeed I found it hard to put down on several occasions. (A beautiful account of this book and its author, by Simon Callow, appears in the February 11, 2021 edition of the New York Review of Books and is well worth seeking out.) Consider mine a six-star review!
Read
December 16, 2020I learned of The Classical Style via Rosen's 2013 NYT obit. According to said obituary, this book became ubiquitously found on syllabi across this great nation for a generation, maybe more, and was considered the definitive text on the classical era. Let me state up front that I am no music major and understood very little of Rosen's more technical writing. And there is a lot of technical writing. Thus, I got through this semi-tome in quick order. Still, I learned a great deal and what I was able to glean I enjoyed. This book was not written for a guy like me but through its entirety I could only marvel at Rosen's knowledge of music in general and the classical age in particular (yes, I did use a lower case 'c' - according to Rosen's wishes). The book is simply an amazing piece of scholarship. I could never encourage anyone to read this as I'm not sure I know the kind of people who could actually comprehend it (save Josh and Emily). But, I can attest to Rosen's brilliance. I wish something of this quality were written about the far-dumber music I spend most of my time listening to. That would be something.
May 30, 2022
i am a conductor and a composer and this is the most influential book i have read about music recently. this is not a biography of haydn, mozart, and beethoven but a comprehensive discussion on the semantics of their style, coherence of their musical language, and the deep connections between them. there are extensive musical examples which i found helpful to play at the piano (not merely listen to) while i read the book. this book will inform any music lover in their listening, interpretation, performance, and appreciation for classical era music. (and i think, despite the title of the book, the musical discussion is often relevant beyond the classical style in many ways. the emphasis on proportion and articulation is relevant to any musical work in my opinion). at times, rosen will focus on a single work for many pages (particularly solo piano music and particularly the hammerklavier and op 110 at the very end) but only because of how representative that work is for a larger point he is making. a must-read.
July 16, 2018
A kimże ja jestem, żeby taką biblię recenzować.
August 13, 2010
One of the best books on music I've read. I would have given it five stars but for the Haydn chapters, and that's my fault: you really have to know the music to get very much from this book, and I'm not very well versed in Haydn.
This is an academic book. Rosen is a musicologist and he makes no special effort to write for the layman. As a result, his prose is full of esoteric technical jargon, some of which went over this layman's head. Still, some of his analyses of favorite pieces strike with the force of lightning. Last night I had one of those excellent moments* when you can't even continue reading because you have to allow yourself time to absorb what was just said.
*For any fellow geeks out there, said moment was his point that early in Beethoven's fourth piano concerto the tonic G chord is made, by sheer rhythmic force, to become in effect a dissonance that must be resolved to D. Fucking unbelievable.
This is an academic book. Rosen is a musicologist and he makes no special effort to write for the layman. As a result, his prose is full of esoteric technical jargon, some of which went over this layman's head. Still, some of his analyses of favorite pieces strike with the force of lightning. Last night I had one of those excellent moments* when you can't even continue reading because you have to allow yourself time to absorb what was just said.
*For any fellow geeks out there, said moment was his point that early in Beethoven's fourth piano concerto the tonic G chord is made, by sheer rhythmic force, to become in effect a dissonance that must be resolved to D. Fucking unbelievable.
March 6, 2021
Haydn established what has come to be known as the "classical style". Mozart elaborated on this and Beethoven went further into and beyond it. Rosen beautifully analyzes the development and growth of this style through his discussion of these three musical geniuses. The result is one of the gold standards of musical history and criticism that belongs in the library of anyone seriously interested in classical music.
January 21, 2020
Though Rosen can be a bit long-winded and his passive-voice writing style can be tiring, the book is full of incredibly useful information to the understanding of music and the genius of the Classical composers Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven. One of the most important books I've ever read; it has basically changed my life.
February 27, 2018
A classic text on the Classical subject; does all the things you'd imagine.
August 25, 2019
Clear, informative, very useful for the classical pianist.
January 25, 2024
This book, written by a concert pianist in the 70s, is a history of the classical style as exemplifed by, as Rosen demarcates, Haydn, Mozart & Beethoven; it is neither quite a general history for popular audiences nor advanced analyses of individual pieces, but rather an at-times polemic manifesto about this period and music in general. Rosen argues pretty thoroughly the main elements of the 'the classical style' are the articulated phrase (in distinction to the squarer rhythms of baroque) and the sonata structure, which he carefully defines in a great chapter on the specific modulations and thematic distinctions of this vague form, and manages to contrast it with something like the baroque Aria de Capo, something I had always found confusing and vague. Indeed, Rosen is a meticulous and exact writer -- he lets no phrase, generalization, or what have you slide, but (in a surgically verbose manner) defines and substantiates everything he mentions. The result is a splendid read that has opened up a great deal of Mozart to me, a great deal of detail I'd never noticed in Beethoven, and indeed all of Haydn to me.
I think everyone interested in this kind of music should at least read Rosen's opening chapters on the sonata structure etc, but the whole read is good, particularly his analyses of Haydn and Beethoven; his obviously incredible love for Mozart leaves his gigantic chapter on the piano concertos a little less informative, as much of it is summarizing the music in prose and commenting on its splendor with almost unlimited enthusiasm. If I had to qualify my appreciation for this book, it would be in its subcurrent for dogmatic classical tonality -- not as opposed to the serialist sense, but rather in his attitude of hostility towards later composers like Schumann and Chopin, who modulated just as frequently & profoundly as Mozart, but who eschewed a rigid sonata structure of tonic-dominant-tonic-subdominant-tonic modulations, which Rosen seems to find inherently inferior in a way that doesn't seem, to me, to stand up to aesthetic scrutiny; but this book has lead me to realize that my very imperfectly-pitched ear cannot hear any but the most brutish and remote of modulations, so perhaps I am simply disqualified from this aspect of music.
I think everyone interested in this kind of music should at least read Rosen's opening chapters on the sonata structure etc, but the whole read is good, particularly his analyses of Haydn and Beethoven; his obviously incredible love for Mozart leaves his gigantic chapter on the piano concertos a little less informative, as much of it is summarizing the music in prose and commenting on its splendor with almost unlimited enthusiasm. If I had to qualify my appreciation for this book, it would be in its subcurrent for dogmatic classical tonality -- not as opposed to the serialist sense, but rather in his attitude of hostility towards later composers like Schumann and Chopin, who modulated just as frequently & profoundly as Mozart, but who eschewed a rigid sonata structure of tonic-dominant-tonic-subdominant-tonic modulations, which Rosen seems to find inherently inferior in a way that doesn't seem, to me, to stand up to aesthetic scrutiny; but this book has lead me to realize that my very imperfectly-pitched ear cannot hear any but the most brutish and remote of modulations, so perhaps I am simply disqualified from this aspect of music.
January 26, 2024
This is one of those books that stretched me. Much of it was beyond me, but what I understood informed me and made me a better listener. Both aspects made it a slow read. In addition, I often stopped to listen to the pieces that Rosen analyzed. Some were familiar, others I can’t recall having previously heard.
My big takeaway is that what I learned about the sonata form in music appreciation and what I still hear repeated in commentaries during the breaks in concert broadcasts is wrong. The sonata was not a set of rules. Rosen writes: “There are no fixed ‘rules,’ although there are successful patterns imitated and even aped, and unconscious habits.” Or, as he also puts it, “the sonata form could not be defined until it was dead.”
Rosen lays out the origins of the classical style in the increasingly strong polarity of tonic and dominant. Other steps in the chromatic scale could increase or relax tension, depending on their similarity or difference from the two poles. Skillful employment of this could satisfy the need for dramatic events balanced by proportion. The language employed by Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven was not a definite form but a way of writing, a feeling for proportion, direction, and texture rather than pattern.
There are many good insights into performance practice. Rosen’s reaction to “authentic” performance is reticent: “A performance is not an archaeological dig.”
From start to finish, this reader felt he was in the hands of a gifted teacher who knew and understood the pieces he discussed, as well as what came before and after in music history. He also situates his discussion in the broader context of movements in the arts and literature of the time.
One thing only holds me back from awarding the fifth star: I like to reserve that for books that are so good that everyone should read them. However, because of the necessary time investment, this excellent book might not be for everyone.
My big takeaway is that what I learned about the sonata form in music appreciation and what I still hear repeated in commentaries during the breaks in concert broadcasts is wrong. The sonata was not a set of rules. Rosen writes: “There are no fixed ‘rules,’ although there are successful patterns imitated and even aped, and unconscious habits.” Or, as he also puts it, “the sonata form could not be defined until it was dead.”
Rosen lays out the origins of the classical style in the increasingly strong polarity of tonic and dominant. Other steps in the chromatic scale could increase or relax tension, depending on their similarity or difference from the two poles. Skillful employment of this could satisfy the need for dramatic events balanced by proportion. The language employed by Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven was not a definite form but a way of writing, a feeling for proportion, direction, and texture rather than pattern.
There are many good insights into performance practice. Rosen’s reaction to “authentic” performance is reticent: “A performance is not an archaeological dig.”
From start to finish, this reader felt he was in the hands of a gifted teacher who knew and understood the pieces he discussed, as well as what came before and after in music history. He also situates his discussion in the broader context of movements in the arts and literature of the time.
One thing only holds me back from awarding the fifth star: I like to reserve that for books that are so good that everyone should read them. However, because of the necessary time investment, this excellent book might not be for everyone.
June 29, 2019
Not easy reading by any means, but if this work isn't a product of genius, it must be close! For various reasons, I took more than 6 months from the time I started this book to finish it. The first reason was that there are hundreds of musical examples in this book, and I wanted at least listen to the ones that were discussed the most as I read about them. Second, I owned this book, and have a revolving door of library books with due dates that I'm always trying to make time to read. Sometimes I get several in at once, and this would get put down for a full month. Finally, this is just very dense and intellectual music analysis. Charles Rosen very meticulously and floridly describes the music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven in various stages and describes how it defines what we call the Classical Style, and even mentions why contemporary composers like Czerny, Clementi, the Bach children, and the other composers fail to fully meet the same standard. In other words, there's a reason why just these three composers are considered the essential composers of the period, and Rosen will tell you why in 460 pages (in my edition). I don't freely acknowledge genius, but I was just blown away by the depth of analysis he was able to get out of so many pieces that, with passive listening, sound so similar.
If you are not a musician or just a casual classical listener, let me warn you: this book is probably going to be way over your head. I'm a professional musician with 6 years of higher education and 20 years of experience, and this took a lot of work! But for anyone who wants to know DEFINITIVELY what makes the music of the classical era what it is, then I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a better resource.
If you are not a musician or just a casual classical listener, let me warn you: this book is probably going to be way over your head. I'm a professional musician with 6 years of higher education and 20 years of experience, and this took a lot of work! But for anyone who wants to know DEFINITIVELY what makes the music of the classical era what it is, then I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a better resource.
June 11, 2017
Just a quotation - pp.162-63
The pretension of Haydn’s symphonies to a simplicity that seems to come from Nature itself is no mask but the true claim of a style whose command over the whole range of technique is so great that it can ingenuously afford to disdain the outward appearance of high art. Pastoral is generally ironic with the irony of one who aspires to less than he deserves, hoping he will be granted more. But Haydn’s pastoral style is more generous, with all its irony: it is the true heroic pastoral that cheerfully lays claim to the sublime, without yielding any of the innocence and simplicity won by art
The pretension of Haydn’s symphonies to a simplicity that seems to come from Nature itself is no mask but the true claim of a style whose command over the whole range of technique is so great that it can ingenuously afford to disdain the outward appearance of high art. Pastoral is generally ironic with the irony of one who aspires to less than he deserves, hoping he will be granted more. But Haydn’s pastoral style is more generous, with all its irony: it is the true heroic pastoral that cheerfully lays claim to the sublime, without yielding any of the innocence and simplicity won by art
June 28, 2025
Pianist and musicologist Charles Rosen elaborates what distinguishes the classical style of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven from the music immediately preceding and following them. It always starts with a close look at the written material, but Rosen doesn't stop with the formal analysis, but goes further to state what effects (emotional or otherwise) are being achieved by the classical mode of composition. Not only, but also due to this book of Rosen, I am coming to appreciate the music of Haydn more and more - I always loved Beethoven anyway. However, not even Rosen could free me from my prejudices against Mozart - not yet.
November 18, 2021
Când Beethoven a părăsit Bonn-ul în 1792, avea cu el un album în care patronul său, contele Waldstein, scria: „Veți pleca la Viena pentru a vă îndeplini dorințele prea mult amânate. . . Vei primi spiritul lui Mozart din mâinile lui Haydn. Într-adevăr, Beethoven ar fi dorit să studieze cu Mozart; a călătorit la Viena cu câțiva ani mai devreme și, se pare, l-a impresionat pe Mozart cu interpretarea sa. Dar Mozart murise de curând, iar Beethoven, în vârstă de douăzeci și unu de ani, s-a îndreptat către Haydn, care îl încurajase deja în timpul unei vizite la Bonn.
March 18, 2019
This was way too dense for me even though I’ve been studying music theory. I scanned giant chunks of it, particularly the detailed analysis of specific pieces of music. But I did learn a lot from the more general information.
July 31, 2023
While there were some interesting things to be gained to increase my knowledge about Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven, it sort of solidified that - on the whole - I'm not that interested into diving into the tonalities of masterworks.
After 500+ pages of tonic, dominant and subdominant, I was done.
After 500+ pages of tonic, dominant and subdominant, I was done.
August 23, 2018
Excellent reference material, but it's written dryly.
Read
March 11, 2020Good
April 11, 2021
Out-of-fashion scholarship, informative nonetheless.
Want to read
March 21, 2022i love this book
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
April 3, 2022Only read a little. Very hard going.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews