Talk:Ludwig van Beethoven/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Daniel Steibelt

We make no mention of this minor figure, yet it might be warranted on 2 grounds:

• in 1800 he challenged Beethoven to a piano contest, but was soundly played under the table
• on 16 March 1820 in St Petersburg he premiered his Piano Concerto No. 8, which has a choral finale. This was 4 years before Beethoven's Symphony No. 9, and 84 years before the next choral piano concerto, Busoni's.

I'm aware of Beethoven's Choral Fantasia in C from 1808, but that's not in sonata form and is in only one movement, so I'm wondering - did Steibelt get his idea from Beethoven, or did Beethoven get his idea for the 9th Symphony (assuming he was aware of its existence) from Steibelt? Or was it completely unconnected? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The melodies of the Choral Fantasy and the last movement of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony are somewhat similar (see the choral fantasy page), and it is generally believed to be a "sketch" of the work. That first part could be mentioned here, though. Asmeurer (talk ♬ contribs) 20:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

"German"

I'm reluctant to raise this issue, given what's happened at Copernicus, but in the interest of accuracy: Is it an oversimplicfication to call Beethoven a "German" composer, given that most of his productive life transpired in Austria? Further, given the stature universally accorded to him, is "German" too limiting? Isn't he in retrospect a citizen of the world?

Sca (talk) 20:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, we'd still call Socrates Greek and Shakespeare English, though one could argue that they're figures of international stature too. My best guess is that Beethoven would have self-identified as German, and that the Viennese probablly thought of him as German also, not as Austrian. (His accent would have marked him as non-Austrian, for one thing.) I think calling him German is fine. 65.213.77.129 (talk) 14:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't see any problem calling him "German" because he was a German-born citizen. It's like people calling Hitler "German". He was Austrian. --Andrewire (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

"The Austrians have completed the feat of turning Beethoven into an Austrian, and Hitler into a German." - Billy Wilder. -- Matthead  Discuß   00:15, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

World citizen? Beethoven? He and hundred other composers were Germans. Go away, Mr. Envy. --84.141.11.179 (talk) 16:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

This seems like false uncertainty

It is known that his family and his teacher Johann Albrechtsberger celebrated his birthday on 16 December. Thus, while the evidence supports the probability that 16 December 1770 as Beethoven's date of birth, this cannot be stated with certainty.

Surely his parents are more authoritative about his birthday than any governmental record. If one does not consider this to be 'certain' then one must question the concept of certainty on epistemological grounds. A government record is not inherently authoritative merely by virtue of being legally official. Birth is not an act of law. It is an act of biology. --75.63.55.159 (talk) 08:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Just because his family celebrated his birthday on the 16. December doesn't mean that was his actual birthday. His birth might have been thought of as "the third Wednesday in December", for example. Or they might have used a day in the general area and called it his birthday. It's very hard to pick out individual dates in the 18th century with certainty afterall. Themfromspace (talk) 09:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I am also troubled by this. Wikipedia must be the only reputable reference source that says he was born on 16 December. True, we do have a footnote "Beethoven was baptized on 17 December; his date of birth—usually given as 16 December—is not known with certainty", but that actually denies the certainty of 16 December. If it's not certain, we shouldn't be stating it as if it were, footnote or no. Many readers can't be bothered with footnotes; they'll just see "16 December", and go off and quote it as if it were fact, which it isn't. There has to be a better way than this. -- JackofOz (talk) 18:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thayer spends several pages discussing the birth date. There is no birth record. However, the tradition was to baptize babies the day after birth, and there is a baptism record, so December 16 seems pretty certain.

kibi (talk) 15:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

• I agree with JackofOz I was going to cite his birthday December 16. Because I read this discussion I was aware of the inacuracy of the information. I just consulted the section for biographies of the Larousee Dictionary and they do not include a birthdate. I believe the birthday should not be excluded. --Juliaaltagracia (talk) 17:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

@ Kibiusa: There is also that fine old tradition: "Traditions are not always observed". Very likely, quite probable etc do not equal "known". There's also this waffly, weasely notion of "not known with certainty" - if we cannot put our collective hand on a Bible and swear that he was born on 16 December - and we can't - then his birthdate is not known at all. I've made an adjustment to the text, because it is inappropriate to virtually bury in a footnote the fact that such a major world figure's date of birth is not known. Yes, it's fine to discuss the theories in the body, but the very first thing we tell our readers should not be something that is unsupportable as a supposed fact, even if it is highly qualified or even contradicted in a footnote, because a lot of readers wouldn't think to click on it because it looks for all the world like it's merely indicating the source of "16 December", when in fact it's gainsaying it. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, you know, we go by the reliable sources here. If other such sources can come up with a different date, fine. But they haven't and 16th seems to fit in with a baptism on 17th, as well as the family celebration of his birthday. This isn't a WP:BLP issue, and a day or so variation seems to be unnecessarily detailed a point to argue. However, all the sources I've seen (although I've only cited the one I have closest to hand) say 16th. I don't think it's worth arguing, per Emerson. Rodhullandemu 22:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Good link removed

The link to http://www.ourdigest.com/gvideos.php?gid=1 has been removed, but it contains all 9 major works of Beethoven in good quality. I am not eligible of editing semi-protected pages, so someone else has to place the link. If you think it is a good idea.

Drwolffenstein (talk) 15:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

First, please put new messages at the bottom of the talk page.

Second, the external link policy notes that sites requiring registration to access their content are discouraged (Wikipedia:EL#Sites_requiring_registration). The site you mention requires registration; this is part of why it was removed.

Third, your site is not generally about Beethoven, or some specific aspect of Beethoven. Even if I thought the site was worth disregarding policy on, it does not have sufficient content to merit inclusion on a composer bio page. (We could just as well put a link to Youtube and a dozen other video sites; I can probably find plenty of other video of Beethoven's music being performed.) Links to the individual symphony videos, if they were accessible without registration, would probably be welcome on the pages of the respective symphonies.

Fourth, I note that this is about to be the third time links to this material are removed after you added it. This should give you some indication of what other editors think of it.

-- Magic♪piano 20:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Funeral

"Unlike Mozart, who was buried in a common grave (as was the custom at the time)" This reference to Mozart's funeral seems irrelevant, this is Beethoven's article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.142.92 (talk) 22:55, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

"indecipherable, uncorrected horrors,"

That sounds like something Spor might have said of Grosse Fugue, but of the late quartets in general? Not convincing. A reliable source would be nice. 78.27.89.8 (talk) 19:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I think this might have a reference to it. Can someone with access check? Any how, a quick google search for "indecipherable, uncorrected horrors" indicates that Spohr is quoted on this elsewhere too, so I doubt someone just made it up. Asmeurer (talk ♬ contribs) 03:02, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I may be the one responsible for the addition (if so, it was a long time ago, before we were rigorously citing sources). I am familiar with the quotation and copied it from a hard-copy source. Unfortunately, a couple days ago (after 78's initial post) I dug through all my usual books and was unable to find it again; I thought maybe it was quoted in Kerman's book on the Beethoven Quartets, but on thumbing through it haven't located it. I'm pretty sure originally it's from Spohr's Selbstbiographie (1861), in German, which by the way is jammed with other quotables about the awfulness of Beethoven's late works: if necessary we could replace it with another. "Ich gestehe frei dass ich den letzten Arbeiten Beethovens nie habe Geschmack abgewinnen können..." und so weiter, in copious detail. Antandrus (talk) 03:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

"...and the Ninth Symphony, perhaps Beethoven's best known work."

Of course, it is a very well known piece of music, but then again so are several other works from Beethoven's canon. There's the first movement of the fifth, the pastoral sixth, the fourteenth 'moonlight' piano sonata and so on. As so many works of Beethoven have become so highly recognised within european culture and beyond, I feel that this may be a little unnecessary? Paulzon (talk) 04:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC

. . . not to mention "Fur Elise" and other candidates for "best known." Seems a bit POV, or at least unsourced speculation. No one is arguing with you, so I'm taking it out.

kibi (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

"Order of the Illuminati"

..this links to a 2003 Speed Metal album by American group Agent Steel, and not the Illuminati as it presumably should.86.134.27.67 (talk) 17:45, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing that out. I have changed it. Tempo rubato (talk) 17:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

That's what I get for not checking all of the links before I commit. Thanks. Magic♪piano 18:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Deafness

A long time ago in the UK, a TV advert for a series of classical recordings stated that B had the legs sawn off his piano so that he could 'hear' its reverberations through the floorboards. Although I remember it well, I have not seen a reference to it since. Is it a myth? Myrvin (talk) 20:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Death

The first sentence reads: "After Beethoven lost custody of his nephew, he went into a decline that led to his death on Monday 26 March 1827 during a heavy hailstorm which was later confirmed by Gerhard von Breuning".

Did GvB confirm the death, the hailstorm, or the death during a hailstorm? The article Death of Beethoven says he wasn't in the room. Also, the sentence suggests some connection between the custody problem and his death. Reference 42 doesn't lead anywhere either. It needs rewriting. Myrvin (talk) 12:30, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I've harmonized the death section here with the content of Death and Beethoven. If Cooper is to be believed, there isn't much causation between the issues surrounding Karl and LvB's relationship and his death. (Said relationship is poorly covered in this article, and was certainly difficult in the last year of LvB's life.) Magic♪piano 12:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Johann Andreas Stein

To the anon IP, please don't revert changes without citing references and including a discussion on this page. Thank you--Work permit (talk) 21:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC) My Bad, Johann Andreas Streicher was Johann Andreas Stein's son-in-law and inheritor of Stein's business.--Work permit (talk) 21:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Nanette Streicher (daughter of Johann Stein) was the builder of the pianos. The firm was alternatively known as "Geschwister Stein" , "Frere et Soeur Stein", "Nannette Streicher nee Stein" , and "Nannette Streicher, geb. Stein und Sohn". Here are some more references, from Continuo magazine,Piano by Robert Palmieri, more available if there is any doubt--Work permit (talk) 22:34, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

To be precise, Andreas did send it to him. I'll cite the actual letter--Work permit (talk) 22:03, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

introduction

Does it seem more appropriate to say "He was a pivotal figure in the transitional period..." rather than "He was an important figure in the transitional period..." in the introduction? It is a matter of style, but changing it would place more emphasis on his role, along with Schubert's, as a revolutionary composer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.127.125.206 (talk) 19:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Giucciardi

Recent edits have added text about Beethoven's alleged proposal to Giulietta Giucciardi. I would like to see this documented, since most of the sources I see don't do any more than suggest he might have proposed, and that the allegation of his "harsh" rejection of her 20 years later is based on a misreading of one of his letters. Those that do claim a proposal do so with no obvious evidence. Magic♪piano 11:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Question

Should Copying Beethoven be included in the section Beethoven on screen as well as the infobox at the end of the article? Even tho it's a fictional account, it is about B... --FeanorStar7 (talk) 08:07, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I supposed there's no issue, considering the other film treatments are also at least somewhat fictional. Eventually this article is going to grow a section or sub-article on cultural references to Beethoven. (I don't think we need to include Beethoven (film) just yet, though.) Magic♪piano 00:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I have copies of symphonies 3 and 9 if you want me to download them.--Launchballer (talk) 10:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Birthday

Rather then giving his baptismal date, how do people feel about giving the date he celebrated his birthday in the lead (with of course the same footnote). This date can be referenced and cited, for example from Letters to Beethoven and other correspondence By Theodore Albrecht, American Beethoven Society, cites a letter written to beethoven in 1796--Work permit (talk) 23:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Beethoven's grandparents Dutchmen? Somebody needs to correst this immediately. I am not a musicologist so i will refrain from correcting an article about such an important composer, but his grandfather was from Mechelen, which is squarely in the heart of Flanders, not the netherlands, even though Flanders and the Netherlands have some common history. In the current provinces of Flemish Brabant and Antwerp, there still are some 'Van Beethovens'. I even know one personally. His name though, is a typically flemish name: "Van" means "from", and anyone who will care to look into a Flemish Phonebook, will conclude that names starting with "van" are predominant. As far as i know, "Beethoven" simply means "beet fields". So, the man had a very mundane Flemish name, literally translated in English: Lewis(ludwig, louis) from the beet fields. Literally translated into German, it would be: ludwig von rubenfeld. Can anyone who can add sources to this information correct this please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.190.253.150 (talk) 01:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

First performance

It says in the article that his first performance was "at the age of nine, not seven as popularly believed" and then goes on to says "It was Johann who falsely claimed Beethoven was six (he was seven) on the posters for Beethoven's first public performance in March 1778." The latter has a reference.

Legacy

No legacy heading??? Are you guys serious? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.167.83.8 (talk) 20:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you that Wikipedia editors have tended to downplay Beethoven's monumental stature in classical music. 71.109.66.239 (talk) 12:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

There should be something in there about his redefining of music and how he lead into the beginning of the romantic era A sharp minor (talk) 18:23, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Teaching

The "Teaching" section has 4 paragraphs. Only two are about teaching. Changing the title of the section or some reorganization is in order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.25.123 (talk) 08:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Abilities

i was curious with his family...because when we held our seminar about abortion,..ahm..lets put it in this way. his father has a syphilis while his mother has a tubercolosis. their ist child is blind,second child dead,third child deaf,fourth child has a tubercolosis..while him is a famous pianist and song writer.. how did he enhance his abilities in this kind of family? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.23.98 (talk) 12:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

heard of that scenario. Imagine a 19 year old pregnant for the fourth time, and you insist she keeps the baby. That would be Napoleon ! You did not rescue Europe from war, or Spain from losing it's New World Empire. Imagine the Netherlands and Denmark losing much of their size. If I was danophobic or somethig, I would beg that 19 year old to keep her baby. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.164.222.45 (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Contradiction

In the section on his early life it states: "His musical talent manifested itself early—apparently he was advanced enough to perform at the age of nine, not seven as popularly believed. Johann, aware of Leopold Mozart's successes in this area, attempted unsuccessfully to exploit his son as a child prodigy. It was Johann who falsely claimed Beethoven was six (he was seven) on the posters for Beethoven's first public performance in March 1778." Was he 7 or 9? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.67.88.172 (talk) 22:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

The text around footnotes 12 and 18 is not congruent. Did he move to Austria at someone's expense? When? Also, the sentence after footnote 12 refers to a person (apparently his mentor mentioned in footnote 18) but does not give a name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.128.1.225 (talk) 05:41, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

There is no contradiction -- he went to Vienna twice, moving (what turned out to be permamently) the second time. The payer of the first trip is unknown, that of the second is known. Magic♪piano 13:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

minor spelling fix requested

In "Musical Maturity", there is this text: The concert, which the Allgemeine musikalische Zeiting described as "the most interesting concert in a long time",

"Zeiting" should, of course, be "Zeitung".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allgemeine_musikalische_Zeitung

Abuelo jack (talk) 01:39, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Good catch! Done, and thank you. Antandrus (talk) 01:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Image:Beethoven death mask4.jpg|left|thumb|A bust based upon Beethoven's death mask.

This image of Beethoven was based on his life mask, not death mask (which shows him emaciated). —Preceding unsigned comment added by LAJones29 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.209.132.100 (talk) 00:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Mr.Ludwig van Beethoven

hello my name is ali i am here to tell what i know about beethoven.he wrote 9 sifineys and he was know has def and alwas throw a fit.Mr.Beethoven would alwas move in with people for other reasons but he could not hear so when he would right a song and peformer for people he did not know if people liked it or hated it.he would have to be turnred around and have to see the people claping and soon be happy.Mr.Beethoven died in the 1800's.and new a boy about 10 years old and became good friends with him.Mr.Beethoven thoght the music was bad but to be honesed i think his music changed the world. by Ali Crawford.10year old girl. Ludwig van Beethoven

Quartet op. 131

In the Beethoven article, one can read the following: « Of the late quartets, Beethoven's favorite was the Fourteenth Quartet, op. 131 in C# minor, upon hearing which Schubert is said to have remarked, "After this, what is left for us to write?" »

Both of those claims need references/citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.97.83.22 (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps this is the origin of the Schubert story above: the celebrated and generally reliable 19th-century music scholar Ludwig Nohl quotes Karl Holz, a close friend of both Beethoven and Schubert, and a good musician, as follows:

". . .Schubert wanted very much to hear Beethoven's C sharp minor quartet. . .[On hearing it] Schubert was sent into such transports of delight and enthusiasm and was so overcome that they all feared for him. . . .A slight indisposition, from which he had been suffering. . .grew enormously worse, developed into typhoid fever, and five days later Schubert was dead. The C sharp minor quartet was the last music that he heard!"

Ludwig Nohl, "Beethoven, Liszt, Wagner", Vienna, 1874, p.11, reproduced in O.E. Deutsch (1958), "Schubert: Memoirs by his Friends", London, Adam and Charles Black, p. 299.

Johninberkeley (talk) 05:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

My response: In Nohl's account, there is no mention of "After this, what is left for us to write?". I wonder where it comes from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.97.83.22 (talk) 20:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Beethoven Reference Site

This site has been completely redesigned and has a new url Beethoven Reference Site It has excellent information, picture galleries and an active forum -Can the editors of the wikipedia site please take a look and consider adding it to your links in the general section of the main Beethoven page. Many thanks (Bezukhov (talk) 10:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC))

As for the site itself (linking to the homepage), I don't think it has much to offer that is beyond our scope. Perhaps it could be deep linked to a certain page which offers up some info that can't be placed on here, such as the picture galleries. ThemFromSpace 21:52, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Well as a reference site that has amongst other things genealogy, home addresses with dates, concert dates, timeline, recommended recordings, information on Vienna and the spa towns, works listed in various ways with information on different categories, extensive galleries and an active forum with over 42,000 posts that has been going 10 years, I would have thought it of relevance on a Beethoven page's general links section. I hope you may be able to reconsider in the future, but thank you for your time anyway. Apologies if I seemed a little brusque earlier, but I was surprised and a little disappointed at the reaction considering the favourable response from others about the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bezukhov (talk • contribs) 20:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The editors should at least use the spelling that the reference site uses for Beethoven's middle name (yes, it's a name) "Van" with a capital "V". Wikipedia's redirect of the correct spelling "Ludwig Van Beethoven" to the incorrect "Ludwig van Beethoven" adds to the epidemic of misspelling of his middle name found throughout the web. This web myth about the spelling of "Van" has become so widespread that even the June 2010 Playbill of the San Francisco Symphony uses the incorrect spelling. The preposition meaning "of" in Germanic languages is "von", not "van". Furthermore, "von" was assigned to the nobility and land owners. Beethoven's parents followed a common naming practice at the time of giving a middle name of "Van" which sounds like "von" and thus makes the child's name sound higher class. Since it is a name and not the preposition "von", it should be capitalized. Also, since the mistake is so widespread, I strongly urge that this controversy about the spelling of his middle name should be explained in the Wikipedia article, at least as a footnote. Nissenbenyitskhak (talk) 22:13, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not a "web myth" that Beethoven's "van" is spelt with a lower case v. It's ALWAYS been spelt that way. Please show me one reputable reference source that spells his name "Ludwig Van Beethoven". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:21, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. I've never seen "Van" as opposed to "van" in any reliable source, Grove's & Chambers included. Accepting that "von" is incorrect, is there any reliable source for the "Van" spelling? Rodhullandemu 22:26, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

ALWAYS is a long time. Okay, you are correct to point out that the deception predates the web. Just as Count Basie wasn't a count, and Benny Goodman wasn't a king, and Duke Ellington wasn't really a duke, Beethoven wasn't a descendant of nobility. The rewritten article explains that he admitted he was not nobility. Later in life, evidently, Beethoven wasn't trying to fool anyone: look at his signature shown below his name on the article page and compare the size of the "V" with the "a" that follows. He clearly uses a capital "V". Then look at Beethoven Genealogy and note the ancestral spellings. Although I believe it to be a mistake, Wikipedia may choose to be conservative and keep the traditional misspelling, but the article should at least mention that it is a name and not a title and that if not for the deception, it would have been spelled "Van". Nissenbenyitskhak (talk) 21:43, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Beethoven's Last Signature Nissenbenyitskhak (talk) 21:49, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I always assumed it was a Dutch, or "Low German", name, cf. Eindhoven. Hence 'van' (yes, lower case), not German 'von'. Rothorpe (talk) 22:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Citations??

From the opening statement: "remains one of the most acclaimed and influential composers of all time.[citation needed]"

Come on....is a citation for this REALLY necessary?? For BEETHOVEN???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.112.220.192 (talk • contribs)

(Moving new section to the bottom) -- No, in my opinion, "so, is the sky really blue"-type demands for citations can be freely removed by anyone. Completely uncontroversial facts need no citations. We don't state that he is the most acclaimed and influential composer -- just one of the most. If anyone really insists, we could cite any one of the standard music history books, but it strikes me as silly. Out it comes. Antandrus (talk) 01:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Use of the drumstick

Proposed Change

In section 1.6 "Loss of Hearing" please remove the following sentence "Beethoven used a special rod attached to the soundboard on a piano that he could bite—the vibrations would then transfer from the piano to his jaw to increase his perception of the sound."

Reasoning

The use of the rod (actually, a drumstick) has only ever been reported by J. A. A. Rattel, who was not a contemporary of Beethoven and could not have seen its use. As this has been reported by no other sources, it should be considered unreliable information and removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zxaos (talk • contribs) 4 March 2010

Y Done

It's apparently not supported by a specific reference anyway. Does anyone know of a reliable reference for the sentence? RobertG ♬ talk 17:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Deafness

I think a section should be added discussing the various views on the extent of Beethoven's deafness. It is completely inaccurate to state that the composer was ever completely deaf; he wasn't. B suffered from tinnitus and - although it worsened with age and there were days when he could hear almost nothing - he could hear a good deal up until his death. To continue to propagate the outdated and over-romanticised view of the deaf composer struggling against some ironic disability is criminal. Something must be done about this. I am willing to contribute. ALSO, I find the entire article to be oversimplified and reductionist. It is also VERY inaccurate in places. [Incidentally I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia editing procedures. I hope I've got it right] 92.234.176.201 (talk) 18:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Ever heard of his conversation notebooks? They give ample evidence that at least by ca 1815 he was utterly unabvle to keep up a spoken conversation. Lots of people who knew him casually refer to his growing deafness which was bad by 1808 and complete by 1820 - and they bring it out by stories which are highly embarrassing to the man, if we'd suppose that he wasn't suffering from progressively impaired hearing. Like, when he tried to conduct an orchestra in 1814 he was unable to hear them in more than a hazy way, and the attempt just caused havoc among the musicians. Strausszek (talk) 23:21, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

List of Works

This article would be improved enormously by the addition of a list of major works, with dates. I just came here for some information, and had to scroll back and forth between the various sections of his life, trying to find out when he wrote various compositions.KD Tries Again (talk) 04:15, 24 May 2010 (UTC)KD Tries Again

Late period vs earlier style

"Beethoven's Late period began around 1815. Works from this period are characterized by their intellectual depth, their formal innovations, and their intense, highly personal expression". As a description of the style of his late works vs the middle period (beginning roughly with the Eroica) that's deplorable. "Formal innovations", efforts to rethink musical structures and to infuse them with powerful emotional dynamism are vital parts of his artistic personality from the first years of the 19th century on. Actually, that's part fo what makes him so appealing to musicians: he had an intellectual ability to refashion existing forms, to transform them radically in ways that seemed organic, and that allowed him to let go of the symmetrical elements that had prevailed in earlier Viennese music. It's no accident he struggled harder to shape his structures and motives than Mozart did. And as for personal expression, obviously the 5th symphony is just as personal as the Hammerklavier Sonata, only they achieve that goal in radically different ways.Strausszek (talk) 23:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Removed commented out text from lead

I removed the following text from the lead section. It was commented out (i.e. invisible to readers) and untouched for more than a year. I'm pasting it here, so that it doesn't disappear in the article history, if anyone wants to use it.

needs elaboration (and citation) in body:
Even during his lifetime, he was recognized by critics like [[[[Ernst Theodor Amadeus Hoffmann|E. T. A. Hoffman]] as an important musical successor to Haydn and [[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]].  His reputation was enhanced in the 19th and early 20th centuries by influential musical writers like [[Robert Schumann]], [[Richard Wagner]], and [[Gustav Mahler]], and his music formed the basis for formal instruction for decades.

Svick (talk) 00:11, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding submission of his head into cold water

I just happened across this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammalian_diving_reflex

May or may not qualify as a link to his reference of putting his head in cold water to stay awake.

It occurs to me that it would be unlikely he would have suffered permanent hearing loss from submerging his head into water periodically. xo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.166.141 (talk) 04:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Illuminati?

Is this true, or is it the works of some conspiracy theorist editing Beethoven's Wiki to smear his name into something like JFK's assassination or some far-fetched reptilian conspiracy? -64.91.131.143 (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Max Unger

It's odd that Max Unger, one of the most important Beethoven researchers, is not cited, quotes, or even listed under the further reading section in this article.4meter4 (talk) 15:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

the bipolar claim

"the book, which took him six years to write and research, is the first readable account of the composer’s medical problems and examination of how they affected his creativity, says Mai" - the person making the claim is also the person stating his work is the first yada yada yada. I propose that the statement in this article be modified so as not to give too much weight to this writer's hypothesis. At the least, shouldn't "Mai claims" be added to the line? Personally, psychoanalyzing someone who's been dead for over two centuries seems very questionable. 98.67.15.179 (talk) 07:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)HammerFilmFan

" Personally, psychoanalyzing someone who's been dead for over two centuries seems very questionable. "... I tend to agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.36.95.12 (talk) 13:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm a psychiatrist and agree that this is speculation with scant evidence. It seems that Beethoven had a cantankerous personality and may have been prone to sadness, but it is a leap to suggest he was bipolar or even clinically depressed. In fact, the evidence may be to the contrary, as he produced some of his greatest works during some dark days, such as the late string quartets. While many artists have suffered from mental illness, it is a mistake to assume that this a requirement for success. It is becoming cliche to find people cherry picking data to support such specious claims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.129.251.28 (talk) 01:41, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Alwinian, 17 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Please insert this movie, to be listed under 'beethoven on screen' http://www.insearchofbeethoven.com/about_the_film.html

• also, the formatting in this chapter follows, in XXXX (year), the last entry, 'copying beethoven' broke from this format.

Thanks! Alwin (talk) 03:19, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Not done: The formatting you see is actually poor prose. The section is written as prose, not as a series of bullets, so the correct practice is to vary the way in which the information is presented in order to keep the reader's interest. Keeping that in mind, could you express the content you would like to have added to that section? Also, the film has numerous online, third-party sources - could you pick one to add as a citation to support this content? Thanks, Celestra (talk) 15:47, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 162.129.251.28, 3 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Under Late works I would suggest a revision. The Hammerklavier is a long, monumental work, and it is unsurprising that he perhaps completed fewer works in 1818.

Current: His musical output in 1818 was still somewhat reduced, with song collections and the Hammerklavier Sonata his only notable compositions, although he continued to work on sketches for two symphonies (that eventually coalesced into the enormous Ninth Symphony).

Suggested revision: His musical output in 1818 was still somewhat reduced, but included song collections and the massive Hammerklavier Sonata, as well as sketches for two symphonies that eventually coalesced into the large-scale Ninth Symphony.

162.129.251.28 (talk) 01:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done Less the word massive. My76Strat 04:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

This acticle is wrong

Ludwig van Beethoven's birth place is wrong. He was born in mechelen, belgium! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.192.213 (talk) 00:07, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Please cite a better source than we already have for this. Rodhullandemu 00:10, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

That's not true at all. Beethoven's grandfather was from Mechelen, and worked there, but his father moved to Bonn. He lived at 515 Bonngasse; Beethoven was born in Bonn. There's nothing even remotely controversial about this -- it's all quite well-documented and established. See Joseph Kerman's excellent article in the most recent New Grove, for example. Antandrus (talk) 01:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 66.41.57.234, 27 February 2011

Please remove paragraph three of this article. It reads as follows; "In the March of 1933, at the age of 162, Beethoven become Adolf Hitler's personal composer. As a supporter and member of the Nazi Party, Beethoven was thrilled to be given such a great honor. He continued to serve this role until the fall of the Third Reich, at which time he mysteriously vanished, never to be heard from again." Many honorable and notable men and women have been supporters of Hitler and his regime, but it is obvious that Beethoven, having died prior to Hitler's birth, was not a supporter of such. Thank you for your timely consideration of this request.

66.41.57.234 (talk) 02:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Already done Alpha Quadrant ^talk 21:44, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Alpha, are you the owner of this article? Looks like it. The text needs a good copy-edit. I have removed some of the more gratuitous wikilinkings per wp:overlink, and have footnoted the horrendous clutter of what to almost all readers will be incomprehensible pronunciation gobbledygood. If you want to know about the subtleties of how his name is pronounced here and there and everywhere, you can now look at the footnote, not hack your way through a forest at the top. Tony (talk) 00:27, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Beethoven & the Nazi Party

This article states that Beethoven was a personal composer to Hitler & the Nazi party, saying he was 162 yrs old and then vanished without a trace. THIS IS INCORRECT!!! In the first paragraph of the article, his death date is mentioned. How this oversight has gotten in to the article is a gross offense to the memory of this great composer. I hope this is fixed immediately! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.66.19 (talk) 02:38, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Copy-edit notes for everyone

Colleagues, your advice please: I've made three changes here:

• PREVIOUS: "Considered to have been the most crucial figure in the transitional period between the Classical and Romantic eras in Western classical music, he remains one of the most famous and influential composers of all time."
• NEW: "The crucial figure in the transition between the Classical and Romantic eras in Western art music, he remains one of the most famous and influential composers of all time."

1. Removed "Considered to have been ..."; by whom? No problem with making the statement, is there? Presumably the refs and info later on will back this up.
2. Removed "most" before "crucial". I don't mind that there's no ref for this (it is the lead); I can't imagine anyone else at the time who could come close (not Schubert). Beethoven was the turning point, if you really want to consider the romantic period essentially different from the classical (I don't).
3. "classical music" -> "art music", to avoid confusion about the period versus the genre.

I do think there's too much clutter about Electorates and Holy Empires and German Nation and present-day Germany (all should be part of the first section instead). At the same time, critical angles are not summarised in the lead, such as those of musical style and technique, influences on him, and his impact on the romantic movement generally. The lead is too short. Tony (talk) 12:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyedit

Enjoy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfstevens (talk • contribs) 00:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 24.231.131.119, 8 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Beethoven performed his ninth symphony when he was deaf, the last 20 years of his life. He never heard his great symphony... 24.231.131.119 (talk) 21:37, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

That's nice, but the article already says so. Magic♪piano 22:42, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Beethoven --> Van Beethoven

Everywhere where "Beethoven" is used in the text it should be changed into "Van Beethoven". The guy his name is not "Beethoven". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maeijer (talk • contribs)

No. Justin Tokke (talk) 00:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Reliable sources are how we decide content issues on Wikipedia. If you can name several significant, recent biographies or encyclopedias in English that use "Van Beethoven" rather than "Beethoven" in the body of the text -- let us know. I haven't ever seen this. Antandrus (talk) 01:30, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

In Germany the "Van" is skipped from the name, so if you are referring to a German source then "Van" should be skipped as well. However the article is in English and this does not follow the German rules of writing names. Basically the name "Van Beethoven" is a Flemish name, which will include the "Van". http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tussenvoegsel Maeijer (talk) 17:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia follows generally accepted conventions, and in the English speaking world he is known as "Beethoven", not "Van Beethoven". If you want to change it here, you'll have to change the majority of the English-speaking world first -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:24, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Sentence/paragraph requiring revision.

"While this evidence supports the case for 16 December 1770 as Beethoven's date of birth, because only his baptismal record survives."

Second paragraph, biography section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.171.163.93 (talk) 12:32, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Fixed; thanks for pointing it out. Cheers, DoctorJoeE (talk) 14:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Dutch pronunciation

Why has this been added? As far as I am aware, Beethoven had absolutely nothing to do with the Netherlands; if we're adding that, then why not the Polish, French and Italian pronunciations? 79.79.72.105 (talk) 13:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree--Work permit (talk) 03:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I imagine someone added it since the van Beethoven family is of Flemish origin (i.e. it's a Belgian Dutch name), as is pointed out in the background section. Seems relevant to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.80.166 (talk) 05:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Belgium was not independant until 3 years after Beïthåofen was dead. Effectively he was of Dutch or Batavic descent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.164.222.45 (talk) 23:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Strange how the English pronounciation is correct on two accounts and wrong with one, while the German is direct opposite.--85.164.220.173 (talk) 23:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree; Beethoven had nothing to do with the netherlands, or even the dutch language —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylejilks (talk • contribs) 21:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC) Why do people keep stating that Beethoven has nothing to do with the Netherlands? This is irrelevant. The issue under discussion is whether a Dutch pronunciation should be included, and Dutch is a language not only spoken in the Netherlands. I refer to this statement in the article "Beethoven was the grandson of a musician of Flemish origin named Lodewijk van Beethoven (1712–1773).[2] Beethoven was named after his grandfather, as Lodewijk is the Dutch cognate of Ludwig." Does this not show that the Dutch pronunciation is relevant? 24.69.71.254 (talk) 16:58, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

A drastical amputation, as usual. The Dutch pronunciation of the surname would have been relevant in order to confirm the etymological correctness of the sound /-v-/ adopted by various languages, since many people share such a doubt. --79.46.71.59 (talk) 10:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I do not think the dutch pronunciation is neccesary. I agree with the first comment. if dutch pronunciation is important, then why not add more languages. I personally do not think the dutch pronunciation is at all important. think about it, your speaking english on this page. why not have this all translated to dutch. it would make just as much sense to translate this to dutch as it would to show Beethovens name translated into dutch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.45.160 (talk) 16:19, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Weird / wrong / irrelevant sentence in "Illness and Death" section

"Unlike Mozart, who was buried anonymously in a communal grave (the custom at the time), 20,000 Viennese citizens lined the streets for Beethoven's funeral on Thursday, 29 March 1827."

Firstly, the Mozart comment is pretty out of place here. Secondly, "the custom at the time" bit? Really? Either cite that, or get rid of it. But I really doubt that was at all a "custom" in the normal sense. But since this article is semi-protected, I can't do anything about it myself. Somebody please fix it. Also, you should probably cite the 20,000 citizens part, too, just to be safe. (Though I really don't doubt it; have you heard his Emperor Concerto? There's a man whose funeral deserves attendance!)

The large attendance at Beethoven's funeral procession is well-attested. The article on Mozart quotes New Grove, which says his burial in a communal grave was "in accordance with contemporary Viennese custom". Now, the sentence construction here is certainly awkward -- the size of the funeral procession has nothing in particular to do with how Beethoven was interred. Magic♪piano 16:36, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Mariuschamberlin, 24 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} I believe that the information concerning the Heiligenstadt Testament should be altered slightly. Here is the text concerning the Testament, under "Loss of Hearing": "There he wrote his Heiligenstadt Testament, which records his resolution to continue living for and through his art." From my knowledge the Heiligenstadt Testament was actually quite the opposite; a suicide letter. He does mention "it was only my art that held me back." However throughout the letter he mentions his own death as being close. In an added portion he makes out some what of a pseudo-will, which starts as follows: "For my brothers Carl and [Johann] to be read and executed after my death...thus I bid thee farewell..." I suggest changing the text to something along the following: "There he wrote his Heiligenstadt Testament, a letter to his brothers which records his thoughts of suicide due to his growing deafness. He never mailed the letter, and most likely never showed it to anyone for the rest of his life." Or maybe take out the "He never mailed the letter..." to keep the portion on the topic of his hearing

Marius Chamberlin 10:46, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Partly done: I didn't find the statements to be opposite at all, so I merged them together, adding the bit about it being addressed to his brothers and about his thoughts on suicide. — Bility (talk) 21:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

GA?

Hello. I am considering a push for at least GA status. There are a few things that need to be fixed up here. For example, the lead should be three to four paragraphs in length. The rest of the article I believe looks perfect. Any ideas or thoughts? Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The "Music" section is woefully deficient (see, for comparison, Edward Elgar). There is no significant discussion of his legacy, which is, given his huge influence on later composers, a vitally important thing missing here. (I did a fair amount of the work to get the article where it is now, but these are subject areas I have difficulty researching and writing about.) Far from perfect... Magic♪piano 14:59, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Should we find more reliable sources (i.e. books about Beethoven's biography) and expand his legacy section, as well as rewriting the Music section to comply with other FAs such as Gustav Mahler? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

That would be the way to go, although writings that focus more on his music than his life may bear more relevant fruit. Someone did a bit of work on Beethoven's musical style, which may provide a starting point for filling in some of this material. It is also unfortunately incomplete, missing at a minimum a discussion of his late period. Getting historical commentary may require looking at biographical materials of other composers (i.e. what did composers like Brahms or Wagner have to say about his influence on them?) Magic♪piano 18:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

No not a random place

Ludwig van Beethoven was born in Rhineland, Germany not the Electorate of Cologne. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Btich (talk • contribs) 00:12, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Cause of deafness

According to many medical authors, Ludwig van Beethoven was autopsied in Vienna on March 27, 1827 by Karl Rokitansky, which identified a “uniformly dense skull vault and thick and shriveled auditory nerves”, consistent with Paget's disease of bone. This was the cause of Beethoven‘s deafness. 1

1 - Creativity and chronic disease Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827) - West J Med. 2001 November; 175(5): 298 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcos37 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

von Beethoven?

I occasionally see references to "von Beethoven", which I assume are erroneous, or are there any instances in which the name has been used, e.g. on sheet music published by his impresarios? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.149.94 (talk) 00:15, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Napoleon's "imperial ambitions?"

Although Napoleon's of relatively little significance in an article focusing on Beethoven I can't help but wonder what it means under the "religious views" section when it says "when Napoleon's imperial ambitions were made clear..." in regards to Beethoven renaming the Heroic Symphony. Beethoven was furious at Napoleon being crowned Emperor, not any revelation of vague "imperial ambitions". 70.181.39.83 (talk) 19:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Um, "imperial ambitions" are what being crowned as an EMPEROR (aka Latin Imperator) is all about. Once Beethoven realized Napoleon was just another another power-mad ego-inflated dictator, he was in opposition to Napoleon. (HammerFilmFan writing from a library-computer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.255.98.162 (talk) 16:30, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Transfer information

The section "Late works" contains a lot of information that should probably be placed within the section "The three periods". Toccata quarta (talk) 05:19, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Religious views

I have merged this article as per the decision of the debate. No new materials, not already covered by the article, were found there which were substantiated by references. --Smerus (talk) 14:35, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Unclear

Regarding Julie ("Giulietta") Guicciardi, the article says Beethoven "dedicated later his Sonata No. 14, popularly known as the 'Moonlight' Sonata to her, as a 'revenge' to a gift by her mother."

The last clause doesn't make sense in English. Perhaps it's a mistaken translation from the German? Sca (talk) 17:38, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

As Steblin (2009) pointed out, Beethoven wrote an angry letter to Julie Guicciardi's mother, after he received a gift from her (as "payment" for the piano lessons he gave Julie), in which he announced his "revenge". Its eems, the dedication of the Moonlight Sonata was meant by this. John E Klapproth (talk) 06:48, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

destruction of conversation books

Under the "Loss of hearing" section, it says that "Out of a total of 400 conversation books, it has been suggested that 264 were destroyed (and others were altered) after Beethoven's death by Anton Schindler, who wished only an idealised biography of the composer to survive."

In the Anton Schindler article, however, it says "More recently, Theodore Albrecht has re-examined the question of Schindler's reliability, and as to his presumed destruction of a huge number of conversation books, concludes that this widespread belief could not be true.[4]" The citation has the quote "In any case, it now becomes abundantly clear that Schindler never possessed as many as ca. 400 conversation books, and that he never destroyed roughly five-eighths of that number."

The Beethoven article should definitely include this bit of information provided by the Anton Schindler article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.100.218 (talk) 02:37, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Beethoven and Crohn's

IMO Beethoven suffered from Crohn's, which explains his diarrea and hearing loss.

See www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16015189

for a medical perspective on this point.

Personally, my cousin has suffered from Crohn's since 1970 and this idea struck her as quite profound, she is a leader in helping Crohn's sufferers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.66.32.93 (talk) 06:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know how much of a distinction it is, but the piece you linked seems to conclude IBD, rather than Crohn's. Maybe that's academic - I'm no expert. That's nevertheless, evidence that one study has reached this conclusion. I'm not sure if more commentary supporting this would be necessary or not, or if it's an improvement to the article to include these studies. Hopefully some of the regular editors on the article can say if they think it's undue/desirable or not. Begoon ^talk 06:37, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

There's actually no shortage of academic sources on the subject. For some pertinent articles from the peer review literature, try pasting Beethoven[ti] here (for open access) or here (for more). For an entire book on the subject, see Diagnosing genius: the life and death of Beethoven by François Martin Mai. MistyMorn (talk) 21:14, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

And, reflecting further on Beegoon's comment above, I think the various issues would be far better housed in a separate article. Just my 2c, MistyMorn (talk) 15:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Late Works, ¶5; re: "Late String Quartets"

Perhaps it is time to remove the unsourced quote: "we know there is something there, but we do not know what it is." -- or find a source. A Google search yielded over 1 million results. Although I didn't check them all, each entry on the first five pages began "One musician commented...". It is a great quote, but unsourced is unsourced. (It seems there might be a few copy/paste folks out there? It is interesting to note that none of the entries begin "A musician...", or "One musician remarked...", or "Somebody...", etc.) ~Eric F. 184.76.225.106 (talk) 06:51, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Willibrod wrong --> Willibrord

Willibrod wrong --> Willibrord is right; please change; Gruedo (talk) 08:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

...of all time

I changed "...one of the most famous and influential composers of all time" back to "...one of the most famous and influential of all composers" for several reasons. Complying with WP:BRD, here are my reasons.

• Time really has nothing to do with it.
• "...of all time" is a cliché, a stock phrase, these days almost meaningless: tabloid journalism that reduces Beethoven's fame and influence to trivia.
• I'm a scientist by inclination, and to me "all time" encompasses the distant future. How do we know it will still be true in 10,000 years time? It may be, but it's a guess. "All composers" does not similarly encompass unborn composers.

Wonder if anyone else has a view, or whether it's just me being a bit grumpy this morning? :) --RobertG ♬ talk 06:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Recently (2 April 2012) I made a similar correction to Claude Debussy with the comment "of all time" not encyclopedic prose. Maybe we need to search the entire Wikipedia for all occurrences of the phrase "of all time." The problem is not just temporal, but also cultural. Zyxwv99 (talk) 13:21, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

@RobertG: Thank you for your revert and the succinct edit summary. I agree with all your reasons. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 16:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Beethover's grandfather

Recently added material about Beethoven's grandfather appears to be correct, but is improperly referenced. Please do not use websites for inline citations if it can be avoided. In this case a brief search on Google Books shows that there are book sources for the same information. (Try search terms: Beethoven's grandfather bonn 20.) Web-links are subject to link rot. Also, for citations from Google Books I would recommend http://reftag.appspot.com/. Just copy and paste the Google Books URL into the box, and it makes a Wikipedia reference for you. Zyxwv99 (talk) 13:41, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.--IIIraute (talk) 00:49, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Introduction

It's beyond woefully inadequate, but I'm not qualified to remedy it. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Moorish heritage?!

I don't have the time to fully investigate this myself, but just surprized seeing no discussion of this thing yet (from 2009, currently enjoying a ton of publicity on tumblr): http://open.salon.com/blog/ronp01/2009/09/27/the_african_heritage_of_ludwig_van_beethoven

In case this holds up (the references seem not too shabby on first glance; not sure if the article itself counts as a reliable source), this seems like a kind of important set of facts to not mention. (Not that it necessarily will. Skimming over the comments, one 'Rw005g' seems to be poking some holes in the argument…) --Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 20:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

That is the biggest load of crock ever. There is no evidence that Beethoven had any Moorish, never mind African, heritage. The references not only are shabby but person on that blog hasn't proven any African ancestry for Beethoven, they just provided shoddy circumstantial evidence and conjecture.

His parents - http://www.madaboutbeethoven.com/pages/people_and_places/people_family/biog_maria.htm and http://www.madaboutbeethoven.com/pages/people_and_places/people_family/biog_johann.htm ... neither show to have any African ancestry. (Angar432 (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2012 (UTC))

'Romantic' Composer

It says:

In a review from 1810, he was enshrined by E. T. A. Hoffmann as one of the three great "Romantic" composers; Hoffman called Beethoven's Fifth Symphony "one of the most important works of the age."

'Romantic' here is linked to the article on Romantic music (i.e c.1830 onwards). At the time of this review, that hadn't happened. Is it really appropriate to link to the wiki article on Romantic music? It may mislead people.

Ronnie268 (talk) 18:57, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Cultural Significance - Voyager Golden Record

Under the music subheading, I added a small reference to the fact that Beethoven's music is featured twice on the Voyager Golden Record (only Bach, with three pieces, is featured more). I believe this is an appropriate, and readily understandable, way to underline his seminal importance in the cultural history of humankind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poplicola1 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Dates of 1787 visit to Vienna

This article (Background and early life section) states that LvB travelled to Vienna in March 1787, leaving after only about two weeks. It cites p.23 of Barry Cooper's Beethoven (2008). But Beethoven and Mozart#Claims of their meeting states that he went to Vienna in January 1787 and left in March/April, staying around 10 weeks. It cites Dieter Haberl, "Beethovens erste Reise nach Wien—Die Datierung seiner Schülerreise zu W. A. Mozart," Neues Musikwissenschaftliches Jahrbuch 14 (2006), 215–55. That seems not to be online, but this page cites it to give similar dates. Cooper appears not to cite a source for his version. This RTF from uni-augsburg.de gives an idea of what Haberl was basing his view on.

So, we have a couple of articles saying different things. Anyone have any idea what is the balance of RSs on this? --Stfg (talk) 15:53, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 August 2012

Please add the following: for the end of the Memorials section, new paragraph.

There is a statue of Beethoven in Pershing Square, Los Angeles, in the vicinity of its northeast corner amongst other statues. It is of him conducting an orchestra, designed in 1932, as the Los Angeles Philharmonic was once an a building across from the park on the north side of 5th St. 66.27.215.96 (talk) 00:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Not done for now: If you provide a reliable source for what you've written, and if consensus allows, I'll be happy to add a shortened version with corrections. Rivertorch (talk) 05:44, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Does [1] qualify as reliable? Toccata quarta (talk) 07:35, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Meh. It verifies the existence of the statue, but there's no indication of the kind of fact-checking or editorial oversight we should expect from the best sources. Let me poke around a bit and see what else I can find. Rivertorch (talk) 09:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

All right, I found a couple of sources. However, I am concerned that the article only mentions three memorials in the whole world—two in Bonn and one in Vienna—so singling out what seems to be a rather neglected statue in Los Angeles might be a little odd. (There must be quite a few statues of Beethoven in the world, after all. Is this one especially noteworthy?) I also see that the article is undergoing a major overhaul, so I'm inclined to leave this for one of "the regulars" to decide. If no one else responds here in a day or two, feel free to change "answered=yes" back to "answered=no" at the top of this thread. Two preformatted refs, if anyone wants 'em:

<ref name=si>{{cite web | title=Beethoven (sculpture) | work=Smithsonian American Art Museum Art Inventories Catalog | url=http://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&profile=all&source=~!siartinventories&uri=full=3100001~!319040~!0#focus | accessdate=14 August 2012 }}</ref><ref name=lat>{{cite news |title=A new sculpture for Pershing Square? |author=Knight, Christopher |url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2010/10/a-new-sculpture-for-pershing-square.html |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=25 October 2010 |accessdate=14 August 2012}}</ref>

Rivertorch (talk) 09:49, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Book references

Hi. I am thinking about using the books from the "Other sources" section of the article and incorporate it into the rest of the article so we can get it to GA/FA status.

Also, I have a thought as well: Is this following book acceptable as a reliable source and is it notable? Burk, John N. (1943). The Life and Works of Beethoven. New York: Random House. ISBN 978-1-40-479572-3.

If there are any other suggestions on which books are to be used, please let me know. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:53, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I am thinking about usinhg his life as a good reference and his book reference to he was the grandson of a muscian of flemish orgin named Lodewijk Van Beethoven — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.56.89.9 (talk) 14:05, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 6 December 2012

Please add the following link to the 'External links' section: Text - "openclassical page for Ludwig van Beethoven (browse and listen to complete works)", URL - https://www.openclassical.com/composer/Ludwig_van_Beethoven

I'll leave the request open for more comments, but I don't see that this link will add anything to the article since there are already links to libraries of his works there. Am I missing something, or is there another reason to include it? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 15:02, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Callanecc, thanks for your comment. For one thing, Beethoven's page at openclassical allows a visitor to actually browse and listen to any of his works via YouTube integration, and also lists links to free scores for each work. It also employs data-modelling heuristics, which means over time his most popular works (based on what visitors listen to) are sorted by this metric, meaning a first-time visitor to Beethoven's music will most likely hear something they will like.

As another example, which in some ways I think even more important, his music is grouped by genre, along with sorting and filtering tools, allowing a first-time visitor to Beethoven's music to quickly ascertain how many Symphonies, Concertos, Piano Sonatas, for example, Beethoven actually wrote. Again, the ability to then go to media and scores very quickly for each work is a huge convenience for musicians and non-musicians alike. The other external links from Beethoven's Wikipedia page do not tend to present this high-level view, so I believe openclassical makes it much easier for the non-expert to become familiar with Beethoven's output. D clef (talk) 15:17, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. My concerns are (1) about linking to a site which in turn links to YouTube uploads whose copyright status may be unclear and (2) that the site, which also provides basic information (composition dates and the like), doesn't have enough information about its author(s) to ensure that its content is reliably correct. I note that you've been linking the site on other composers' articles, so the question of its suitability as an external link goes beyond the scope of this one talk page. (It's a cool site, though, I'm the first to agree! ) Rivertorch (talk) 19:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Anecdote about not hearing applause

The anecdote cited under Loss_of_hearing seems to say that Beethoven wept for joy, not for sorrow at his deafness. The cited resource is itself quoting a poem by Roden Noel, which described Beethoven's disappointment when he heard nothing, but then his rejoicing after someone turned him around so he could see the audience.

Shouldn't the article be edited to reflect that? bendodge (talk) 20:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand what you would like the article to reflect; maybe you could suggest some phrasing. There is a bit more on this at the Ninth. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Crosses rise!

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: The crosses in human life, such as pitch in music. They set up! It is well known that a statement of Ludwig van Beethoven, which is comparable to that of Friedrich Nietche "What does not kill you, it's you stronger"!78.3.221.243 (talk) 18:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Deaf?

The last sentence of the lede reads, "During the late 18th century, his hearing began to deteriorate significantly, yet he continued to compose, conduct, and perform after becoming completely deaf." First, modern sources indicate he never became "completely deaf," although saying simply "hard of hearing" would seem to be an understatement. Second, I know of no instance where he conducted or performed publicly after about 1818. He "beat the time" at the premiere of the 9th Symphony, but the orchestra was advised to ignore him. Shall I fix this? If no comments, I'll do that. Opus131 (talk) 03:54, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Done. Opus131 (talk) 23:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

German pronunciation

In reference to Talk:Ludwig van Beethoven/Archive 4#Pronunciation of Beethoven's name (IPA): The pronunciation with [k] is not wrong. It's entirely standard. Both [k] and [ç] are possible in the ending -ig; [k] is the typical pronunciation in the south – including but not limited to Swiss and Austrian German –, [ç] in the north of the German-speaking area. Compare de:Aussprache der deutschen Sprache. The misconception that the [k] pronunciation is somehow "dialectal" seems to originate from and is, unfortunately, still promoted by provincial and uninformed speakers in Northern Germany. (In fact, in Central German dialects, all instances of word-final or morpheme-final g – except ng, which is often rendered as [ŋk] word-finally – are pronounced palatal, as [ç] or sometimes [ʃ] or even [j], except immediately after back vowels, where [x] or [χ] occurs, while in Upper German dialects, all are pronounced [k] or [g] without palatalisation or fricativisation. In any case, dialectal and standard pronunciations are completely different beasts and not to be confused.) Both pronunciation variants are completely valid in Standard German, neither preferrable to the other, and both should be shown in the intro. In general, a Northern German bias should be avoided when giving German pronunciations anywhere. Like many other standard languages, Standard German is a pluricentric language, i. e., has regional and national variants that must be fully acknowledged. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 13:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

However, I think there is a mistake with the sound of 'ee' in Beethoven: it should be 'i:', instead of 'e:', shouldn't it? 82.158.61.235 (talk) 10:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure which sounds you mean, but the German pronunciation, expressed in IPA symbols, is not wrong as shown in the article or in this sound file: File:De-Ludwig_van_Beethoven.ogg, although there are legitimate regional variations, e.g. File:De-Ludwig van Beethoven (2 Varianten).ogg and others. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Omission of "van" in text

Why is he referred to as "Beethoven" in the text, instead of "van Beethoven"? For example in "Beethoven was born of this marriage in Bonn." With others, the "van" is not omitted. Vincent van Gogh is referred to as "van Gogh", for example in "Van Gogh began to draw as a child, (...)". Which one is correct? Why? Cursarion (talk) 08:26, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Most English-language sources refer to him as "Beethoven", not "van Beethoven". I do not know what sources that discuss the painter use, but I've never heard him called just "Gogh". Magic♪piano 12:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Same in German; "van" is only used with the full name, Ludwig van Beethoven, never with the surname alone. Why? The best answer I can come up with, and I know it's not much: "convention". I suspect though that van Gogh may be the odd one out. Almost all the "von" names I can think of are habitually also used without it. Why not Gogh? Possibly because its seriously un-mellifluous. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:48, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

You must be thinking of that other famous van who had a 6th Symphony. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Beethoven and Goethe

I find it hard to believe there is not a single mention of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in this article, despite the fact that Beethoven said himself that he idolized Goethe.

http://www.gramophone.co.uk/features/focus/a-meeting-of-genius-beethoven-and-goethe-july-1812 Darktangent (talk) 04:19, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Be bold! DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 05:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Louis, Louis

he signs his name "louis" on several manuscripts. yet not a peep here or much of anywhere else that he used this name/nickname/petname.

"Louis van Beethoven" consistently brings up his GRANDFATHER. so why not a line here that he was [nick]named after same, and that he actually USED the form? 173.9.95.217 (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Strikes me as a bit too much information. Other editors may disagree. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 21:46, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Here he writes Luigi in the pictured dedication, - they were more international then ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:52, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

How fascinating. Not too much information at all. Deserves a mention, I think. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:14, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Anyone ever heard of this obscure piece? Seems to be Louis there. 173.9.95.217 (talk) 14:28, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Too obscure by far. But how about this one? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:39, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Is it, in fact, the case that EVERY manuscript he published in French used "Louis" and every one he published in Italian used "Luigi"?

I do not think this is well known at all. Did other composers do this?

If I'm not mistaken, they are all "Ludwig" on modern copies. 173.9.95.217 (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

And I'd guess all published in Hanoverian UK were attributed to "Lugwig". Some LvB scholar here is bound to know? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Legacy and Influence

Beethoven's influence on subsequent music is staggering, from Schubert to Wagner, and yet not a word about this in the article. What's going on? All in all a poorly written affair: spelling errors and muddled discussions, for instance on the "middle period" designation. Get some quotes from Tovey and show why this composer is held in such high regard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orthotox (talk • contribs) 08:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Push up?

Anyone feel like pushing this for GA/A/FA class? George8211^{what did I break now?} 18:41, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Mistake

This article proves that the line that says "In about 1800 his hearing began to deteriorate, and by the last decade of his life he was almost totally deaf" is inaccurate. It should have the "almost" removed from the sentence, and it should also say "In the late 1790s, his hearing began to deteriorate, and by the last decade of his life, he was completely deaf."

To further show proof that this change is accurate, here is the sentence straight from the quoted source above: "Although nearly overwhelmed by a progressive hearing loss--his biographers have failed to discover what caused it to begin in his late 20s, but it is known that he was completely deaf for the last ten years of his life--his disability added to his popularity.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nasmith29 (talk • contribs) 08:30, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Infobox

Many other popular articles on famous people have an infobox summarizing the persons details. But there isnt any infobox in this article ? Any particular reason ? Anandtr2006 (talk) 14:26, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Composers#Biographical_infoboxes for some. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:27, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Relations

In the Background and Earlylife section of this article it states " Lodewijk had one son, Johann (1740–1792), who worked as a tenor in the same musical establishment and gave lessons on piano and violin to supplement his income.

Clicking on the link to Johann takes you to an article about Johann Beethoven that States "Johann van Beethoven[1][2] (ca. 1739 or 1740[3][4] – 18 December 1792) was a German musician, teacher, and singer who sang in the chapel of the Archbishop of Cologne, whose court was at Bonn. He is best known as the father of the celebrated composer Ludwig van Beethoven (1770–1827). Bonn was the place of his birth and death. I believe the mistake is in the second article. Johann may have been his son but this is not him... this is the father. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidgurtler (talk • contribs) 09:19, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't follow. This article states that Lodewijk van Beethoven had a son, Johann van Beethoven, who was the father of Ludwig van Beethoven. Where is the mistake? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Ancestors from Beethoven is Dutch and Belgium !!

http://www.belgieninfo.net/artikel/view/article/woher-kommt-beethovens-van/ Please put Beethoven in Dutch and Belgium Category.

I am from Belgium, I like Belgium as much as any Belgian, I like Beethoven as much as any Belgian and I like the Dutch as much as any Belgian, but let's be realistic, he was one quarter Flemish and three quarter German. This said put it in any category you want. Contact Basemetal here 10:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

The witch

Was the wife of an ancestor of Ludwig's at the 7th generation who was burnt as a witch in the market place in Brussels in 1595 (presumably Josyne van Vlesselaer 1540-1595?) actually herself in Ludwig's family tree or was the witch not actually herself an ancestor of his, but rather that guy's second wife? Various websites contradict one another so I'm confused. Contact Basemetal here 10:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC) PS: I know the word ancestress exists but I don't like it :)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2014

i would like to edit this page because some of the times are wrong and the symphonies and links are wrong Lucascooper (talk) 11:11, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: It is not possible for individual users to be granted permission to edit a semi-protected article. You can do one of the following:

• You will be able to edit this article without restriction four days after account registration if you make at least 10 constructive edits to other articles.
• You can request the article be unprotected at this page. To do this, you need to provide a valid rationale that refutes the original reason for protection.
• You can provide a specific request to edit the article in "change X to Y" format on this talk page and an editor who is not blocked from editing the article will determine if the requested edit is appropriate.

Thanks, --ElHef (Meep?) 13:45, 8 April 2014 (UTC)