Nicolas Croze-Orton wrote:

>I think the Beethoven violin concerto is one of the most
>boring concerto`s ever written.  Any other list member`s on my side?

Not me.  However it is not one of his "heroic" works, e.g.  the "Emperor"
concerto.  I think of it as relaxed, expansive.  In the finale, since it
is a rondo, you hear the main theme a lot.  Beethoven's challenge was to
construct a theme that would sound good on repeated hearings and would also
be capable of development.  I think he succeeded quite well.  In the first
movement, there are many things that keep it from becoming boring.  When I
think of the first four notes in the timpani I think, who would have
expected a violin concerto to begin that way? (I believe Bartok was
thinking on similar lines when he began his 2nd violin concerto with harp
chords.) As the movement unfolds we hear Beethoven working as if he wanted
to show what could come of four repeated notes.  With Beethoven it is
always the awareness of structural goals that keeps the music going.  The
themes themselves taken away from their development or working-out may seem
inconsequential, even banal.  Still it's wise to remember that Schumann
said something like Beethoven's scales are not like those of other
composers.  In that context I remind you of the sequential scale passages
in the development of the Emperor concerto (I).  I used to think that was
a boring passage--filler--but I don't any more.  It's the power of the
harmonic sequence coupled with the dialog between piano and first violins
that makes it work.  If you want an example of filler sequences try the
development section of the Tchaikovsky violin concerto (I).  Now THAT'S
boring!  And I like the concerto.

Chris Bonds