Corgan Sow

I think it would be refreshing from all the religious debates in other boards here. Who do you think are greatest composers? I don't think Beethoven can be disputed as the "general of musicians" (from a Musicweb UK site) because I think many great composers like Wagner, Brahms and Bruckner are all inspired by him, and Beethoven's music is the trendsetter.

I read a lot of articles by music scholars and critics and among the names, the titans most familiarly resound so far after Beethoven are Brahms, Wagner, Mahler, J.S Bach (all German?!) and I don't know if Borodin, Tchaikovsky, Schubert are also on the lists base on "cult" popularity.

Anyway, feel free to discuss. I don't think I have much to share since I'm not a music scholar anyway =P

Jutsuka

You forgot Mozart...

Opera Nut

My disclaimer: I've played music for decades on several instruments, and heard a ton of it myself.
(See my post in What Instruments do you play?) I have never taken a classroom music course and tend to make my own opinions.

People disagree on who the TITANS of classical are.

Sure, people may say Beethoven is IT, but I will break it down.
I will say yes there are certain pieces of his that I think are wonderful, and others that are too ponderous. In other words, they have too much vertical density (chords) and not enough horizontal movement (melody).

I really like the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Beethoven Symphonies.

The 9th is too damn long and the 5th has been played to death.

Then there are the people who are superb in one small field, like Chopin and piano music. Or Schubert in several forms, but always fabulously inventive melody.

Lots of the russians are quite inventive and melodic.
I've played way too much ballet music, and if i hear another Tchaikovsky ballet, including swan lake, nutcracker and romeo & Juliet, Sleeping Beauty, whatever, I will be bored to death. I've played it all and have it in my fingers.

Or do you like innovative orchestration? Brahms is terribly unimaginative in his orchestration, and there isn't a whole lot of MEAT there. Nice tunes but not a lot of change going on.
Brahms is heavenly for string players, nice romantic stuff.

Rimsky-Korsakov wrote a book on Orchestration that is still in print and I have read it. He wrote Scheherezade and lots of other good stuff.

And then there are gems you discover when you find a great piece in an area where you had no idea they excelled.

I'm thinking of a sextet (or octet?) for strings by Tchaikovsky that is great and I didn't know he did chamber music. Also a piece called Souvenir de Florence.

I'll throw in two cents for Mahler's First, Mendelssohn, Chopin, Schumann, Schubert, Mozart and a bunch of the slightly lesser known Russians (Borodin, R-K, Moussorogsky, Glazunov) and Dvorak for melodic Beauty.

And Prokofief and Stravinsky for weirdness and innovation and orchestration.


I don't justify my taste with academic reasons. I just say "Here, listen to this, this is good stuff and I dig it!!".
[[[Plop victim in front of stereo cabinet and hit PLAY]]]]

dangin

Delius

scarmig

J.S. Bach.

Everyone else is discarded Twinkie Wrappers.

Except for Chopin.

Corgan Sow

Or do you like innovative orchestration? Brahms is terribly unimaginative in his orchestration, and there isn't a whole lot of MEAT there. Nice tunes but not a lot of change going on.
Brahms is heavenly for string players, nice romantic stuff.

I just hate it when people miss out Strauss (not that waltz king klutz!) when it comes to innovative orchestration. Brahms is akin to Bruckner's orchestration modeled after Wagner; it's been done before (read; Schumann, Schubert, Beethoven). He is the core of German opera repertoire alongside Wagner. The opera Salome inspired all those Williams and Elfman stuff we hear in theatres (Dance of Seven Veils, anyone?). I sure want to to dig his Der Rosenkavalier, Arianne Und Naxos if I have the cash.

As for strings, Bruckner shows off the strings more than other composers I can think of. His 5th, 7th, 8th and 9th are Berlin Philharmonic's best tools.

I'm thinking of a sextet (or octet?) for strings by Tchaikovsky that is great and I didn't know he did chamber music. Also a piece called Souvenir de Florence.

You didn't know? You should listen to his Serenade for Strings (wait, that's not chamber, right?). Anyway, who do you think are masters in their chamber writing? Brahms, Schubert and Beethoven comes to my mind.


I don't justify my taste with academic reasons. I just say "Here, listen to this, this is good stuff and I dig it!!".

You know, sometimes I thought Schoenberg's followers are like hopeless Scientologists =P

Hawkingfan

I think in general, people will tell you "The Three Bs" and Mozart.
I think these are weak reasons. I don't think they're even true. I love the vertical densities, especially in the 3rd symphony. And he will usually contrast them with beautiful contrapuntal sections, often appearing in the second themes of his sonata forms (usually orchestrated with woodwinds). Beethoven loved Bach and learned a great deal from studying him. Beethoven was a master contrapuntalist. The counterpoint in the ninth is some of the best ever.
I love them all, even the First which was revolutionary at the time. Many people said it wasn't music. They were dead wrong.
The attention span and concentration needed to hear the ninth is cake when compared to most operas. Being an opera nut, it shouldn't be a trifle at all. I think the length is perfect. Being cyclical, it had to be longer.
How many times have you heard it live? I've only heard it once. With life's busy schedules, it's difficult to hear it more often. I wish I could.
I don't think you are listening close enough at all. I can't think of a more economical, compact, effective use of "meat" in a set of pieces as in the 4 Brahms symphonies. You couldn't be more wrong when you say "not a lot of change going on". Analyze the first movement of the fourth. Not only will you find rapidly changing, colorful orchestration, you'll find the melody changes by augmentation, diminution, inversion, double augmentation/diminution, retrograde, retrograde inversion, "hocketing" (more than one instrument dividing the melody up), melody distributed and "hidden" over a vast number of measures with ancillary notes in between...and all other sorts of ideas. And a lot of it done even before the Exposition is over in the sonata form.
There is a piano trio of his that is quite famous and is brilliant.
I wouldn't call these guys weird. Have you heard of Stockhausen, or Harvey Sollberger, or Mario Davidovsky? Even Webern could be considered more "weird" than Prokofiev and Stravinsky.

Hawkingfan

Wrong. Brahms was opposed to Wagnerian orchestration. His orchestration is not based on Wagner in the least. During his time, there was a great rivalry between the two composers. People debated on who would be the great composer to take over where Beethoven left off.

Hawkingfan

I think Beethoven revolutionized classical music more than anyone before or after him. In the later half of the symphonies he revolutionized orchestration by adding many instruments to the orchestra including the piccolo, contrabassoon, trombone (previously used only in operas and church), bass drum (previously used in operas), choir, and his virtuosic writing for the double-bass. He also revolutionized the symphonic and sonata forms by introducing the scherzo 3rd movement instead of using the Minuet in the symphonies and quartets. In those same pieces, he also brought in the idea of cyclic form and the idea of program music. His unique use and style of dynamics was revolutionary as well. He also changed the definition of what a qualifies as a melody, especially in the late quartets. He revolutionized the modulation of key changes in the sonata form (especially the quartets), for example, instead of modulating to the dominant key in the second theme of sonata form, he would modulate to the sub-mediant. Also in the quartets he revolutionized the same form by adding sections and the order of recurring first and second (or third) themes and by developing intro and transition themes in the Development section of sonata forms. I could go on and on...

Hawkingfan

Another great innovator and orchestrator was Berlioz. Many of his harmonies were way ahead of their time. Some where solely based on counterpoint but when lined up, would not make triadic harmonies. Sometimes it made clusters. This was probably due to the fact that Berlioz was not a pianist, so his mind was unrestricted. You could label some of his music "atonal".

One composer who I think is greatly overlooked for his orchestration and innovation is Debussy. I think Debussy was a genius among geniuses. I'm sure Stravinsky would agree. Orchestral pieces that he wrote over a hundred years ago still sound "contemporary" and "modern" to me. Even more so than a piece from a living composer. Or Stravinsky (without Debussy, who knows if Stravinsky would have been Stravinsky), Webern... Debussy's music and orchestration is just so original and fresh and beautiful, words can hardly describe it. Without Debussy, I'm not even sure where the twentieth-century would have gone to musically. The second Viennese school (and the "3rd" like Boulez)and it's opposing school (Stravinsky, Bartok) both took there inspiration directly from Debussy.