Differentiating between Baroque and Romantic Music
 

It is difficult to explain the difference between romantic and baroque music to non musicians, but I am trying to. I have chosen a video of me playing some baroque music and romantic music to identify different characteristics. So you think this is the best way, or how would you explain this difference?

I think the best way is to study the difference in how the music was composed.

And that's probably the only thing I ever learned in Music Appreciation during college.

Well for starters, listen for the harpsichord :D


Seriously, though...

The differences between baroque and other styles of music are hard to explain, but there are some clear differences. Maybe some of this will help:

The baroque period is known for a motoric rhythm. Typically, you'll hear a constant 8th or quarter-note rhythm in at least one part. That isn't always the case. The baroque period also made the art of fugal writing more famous.

Baroque music can typically be homophonic (one melody accompanied by another part or parts that are not the focus) or polyphonic (the goal of which is for every part to sound as its own independent melody, and beautiful in harmony, together).

Romantic music marks a shift towards more adventurous harmony. Whereas previously, music would be more diatonic (in one key or another), Romantic harmony began to stretch the limits of what was acceptable. Harmony became much more chromatic and ultimately this allows for further expression through more sudden changes, emphasis, etc.

Much more explanation might be too complicated but I'd be happy to explain more if you're still looking for more. I'm also unsure if you're looking for a "for dummies" version of this for listeners.

I remember that before I really got into 'classical' music, I couldn't really tell the difference between the major eras. Now, I can't fathom not being able to tell the difference between Bach and Chopin, and I can usually identify the the composer of a piece I've never heard before, or at least get close to the mark.

I've never realized it until I read this thread...but yeah, it is kind of hard to explain it in layman's terms. I guess a good indicator would be the degree of (I know this is really subjective) "drama" within the piece. Baroque and previous-era music tends to be kind of reserved dynamic-wise, whereas Romantic music has the tendency to be a tad bit bombastic (especially the later composers). This same principle could also be applied to emotional expression, since the now popular philosophy that music's primary purpose was to express one's self didn't really catch on until Beethoven came around. Again, that's incredibly subjective and not really helpful, but that's all I have for you at the moment. =\

Well, from a classical pianists point of view, baroque keyboard music is pre-pianoforte, so was originally written for organ, harpsichord, or spinet... However today it's easy to mistake it for "classical" as it'd probably be performed on piano.

I find that in Baroque music, time signatures are quite strict and stately, and everything is in harmony. Romantic pieces have much more rubato, as in, not as strict and stately in time and rhythm.

I agree that stated as simply as possible (with exceptions of course): baroque is more structured, steady, and "stately" (to use Lateralus' word) with everything in a standard sort of harmony harmony and with consistent recurring rhythms (and harpsichord!). Think a king marching steadily and happily down a great hall.

Meanwhile Romantic is more loose, fluid, and elegant, with more diversity in the arrangements and arguably more experimentation (it was a couple steps into the future from baroque). Think the gentle swooping strings of a love scene!

I'm new to all things classical, but have been doing some light research when the mood strikes. Google is my friend! :p

I'm curious what particular pieces/artists would fall into each of these particular categories?

Between the baroque era (1600-1750) and the romantic era (1830-World War I) stands the classical period proper (Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, although Beethoven definitely headed towards the romantic). There are reasons for the dates: the invention of opera, the death of Bach, etc., but in practice the developments were gradual. Opera started almost exactly in 1600, but it wasn't as if every composer in Europe got the news flash and said, "aha, we're now in the Baroque!" Bach, a baroque stalwart, was considered an old fogey by the time of his death and all but forgotten for two generations: classical-style trends were already underway. (In his Prelude in E-flat for organ, perhaps Bach wanted to show that he was perfectly able to compose in this new style, thank you, and it is a masterpiece, yet his heart wasn't in the style.) The baroque era itself was rather romantic in spirit. Look at the architecture, for instance.

One impetus for the Romantic period in all the arts was the industrial revolution and at least a vague horror of its effects on people's lives. The reaction involved elements of nostalgia and love of countryside, nature, simpler ways, folk heritage, and national identities growing out of common blood lines. (Some of this, of course, would eventually be horribly exploited by the Nazis. No wonder they idolized the ultra-romanticist Wagner).

Hearing is believing. You can explain that baroque relied on fugues and ground bass and all that. That it was fractal in nature--small riffs that made up larger riffs which made up even larger riffs.

Romantic, as the name implies, is much more emotional music. Baroque had a more cold intelligence to it. You're also skipping a period between baroque and romantic.

But all the explaining in the world doesn't mean squat if they can't hear it.

Personally I think good baroque is more romantic than Romantic music. The emotion in baroque music, especially someone like Bach, is there, but bottled up. This actually makes it more powerful; think of a pressure cooker.