Apropos of the above comment, most musicians I know feel that way about Mozart.
There’s just magic.
An epithet I once made up:
”Mozart tickles the soul”
There’s just magic.
An epithet I once made up:
”Mozart tickles the soul”
77 responses Add your response
I read through the responses the other day and refrained from responding. The pandemic and a new CD player with a good DAC encouraged me to listen to and expand my music collection. I soon began to focus on classical music and to appreciate Mozart more than ever. I sometimes try to listen to the other greats, especially Beethoven, but keep coming back to Mozart, especially his chamber music, to the extent that I sometimes need to take a break from his intensity. Today I came across this, which, I feel, makes much of what I read the other day somewhat irrelevant: "As with all great artists, Mozart expressed not only the soul, the taste and the aroma of his epoch but also the spiritual world of man--man for all ages, in all the complexity of his desires, his struggles and ambivalence. Some of us, who only identify in Mozart a certain aristocratic refinement, may find these words strange. Often we meet with a condescending attitude towards him, to his music, reminiscent of the chiming of bells in a music box! 'It's very nice but not for me," say such people, 'Give me passion--Beethoven, Brahms, tragic, monumental...." Such comments only reveal one thing: these people don't know Mozart." --L Bernstein |
| Post removed |
It is often hard to ignore the historical context of any artist, so I can understand why Wagner is so reviled. But, if one can just isolate the music, and how he melded the music to the drama, he is quite an important artist. I don't think gg107 said that he was as great as Bach, merely that he has been under-appreciated. If I were to attach the same kind of historic responsibility to the Passion plays of Bach and the B Minor mass, in comparing Bach and Wagner, I would have to conclude that the Nazi body count is pretty paltry compared to that of Christianity. |
Gee., why would anyone be upset about a man who played a major part in killing at least 6 million men . women and CHILDREN . Surely knowing incest is A-OK is far more important than a few million children being burn to death . Wagner was/ is just one of the most evil persons who ever walked , but surpasses Bach in your mind, ok . With Easter near, Bach’s Passions are played all over the Western World. This year I must remember the death of Christ is not as relevant as Wagner’s homage to incest . To put him in the class of the Bard is beyond belief . |
One can certainly dislike Wagner -- much of his music occupies a psychological/emotional space that many can find uncomfortable. We are each entitled to our preferences. But I think it's far more likely that Wagner is generally underrated than overrated. This is because many people come to Wagner's operas with so much extra-musical baggage -- based on mostly his despicable anti-Semitism, and his posthumous adoration by Hitler -- that it's difficult for him to get a fresh hearing. But Wagner's music can be surpassingly beautiful (e.g., the love theme from Tristan and Isolde), or tremendously exciting (e.g., the storm scene from Die Walkure). As a musical dramatist, Wagner arguably has no peers. The Ring cycle is one of the great family dramas, a work that profoundly welds terrific music with penetrating psychology --in my view, just a notch below the works of Shakespeare and Tolstoy. For those unfamiliar with Wagner's work (apart from the Ride of Valkyries, used in the film Apocalypse Now and too many commercials), I suggest you try conductor Georg Solti's recording of Wagner's Ring -- a fabulous sonic feast, and one of the greatest recordings ever made. |
I do like some Wagner quite a lot, but I just can't put him among my favorites. Part of the problem for me is that his stuff just goes on too long. Eventually, a sameness creeps in. There's also a pomposity that can rub me the wrong way. Yeah, I do have my share of Wagner on the shelf. But apart from the Siegfried Idyll and the first side of Die Meistersinger I probably haven't put any Wagner on the stereo this century. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
An interesting discussion, and revealing to me in terms of one specific composer: Richard Wagner. I think I saw Wagner’s name mentioned once, as a "candidate" for inclusion in the top five. Nobody dared to put him on their list. Which is odd. Everyone with an interest in music of any kind should at least read a review of Wagnerism, Alex Ross’s vast 2020 book (it runs over 750 pages!) This isn’t a biography or analysis of the German composer’s music but an investigation of his influence on most intellectual aspects of human existence. Not just Art, of course—the subtitle of Ross’s book is "Art and Politics in the Shadow of Music." But an astounding array of great non-musicans including writers, poets, visual artists, dancers, filmmakers, and architects all incorporated Wagner’s approach to creating their own work. And they all regarded him highly not because of some theoretical "advance" he was responsible for but because of the effect Wagner’s music had on them. So, Friedrich Nietzsche, Thomas Mann, James Joyce, WEB Du Bois, Theodor Herzl, Willa Cather, Isadora Duncan, JRR Tolkein, Anselm Kiefer, dozens of film composers, and so many others were all committed Wagnerians. But though the operas are as popular as ever onstage and on recordings, Wagnerism has declined sharply since the 1940s, thanks to an association with totalitarianism that won’t be vanishing soon, if ever. Listeners are less likely to admit to loving his music, which is as intoxicating as Tchaikovsky, as lyrical as Schubert, as dramatic as Beethoven, and as spiritual as Bach for fear that it marks them as a fascist or bigot. The fact that Wagner’s music continues to powerfully endure despite all its "baggage", even if it’s no longer a kind of religion, tells us something. |
Who did everything well? For my money Mozart and Haydn were the only two who wrote well no matter the genre whether it was chamber, orchestral, opera, church music etc. Haydn's opera's aren't well known as they were written for Esterhazy rather than the stages of Vienna. Bach is Bach, no opera's but I have to say the oratorios and the 200+ cantata's probably make up for it. Music for theatre or stage is where Beethoven and Schubert come up short for me, but I love them just the same. Surprised at no mention of Berlioz or better still, Purcell. Good call on Monteverdi, whoever it was who added him. |
| Post removed |
Good grief Schubert, everyone knows the world’s greatest sporting event is the Tour de France. Sheesh! But what do you expect from a guy so lost he doesn’t know the world football championship isn't a "cup" it's called the Super Bowl. Probably thinking of the one little kids play at, the one where everyone runs around maybe every once in a while somehow a point gets scored, or not, no one cares, everyone gets a participation trophy. Please if you are determined to be hopeless at least be like the others and stick with audiophile hopelessness, okay? |
It's like this .The world's greatest sport event is the World Football Cup (yes, Americans) . For an analogy the the Winner is Bach. Score , Bach 26 Runner up 8 Devout Christian Music lovers, love him because he makes us love God even more than anyone else can. Music is God's greatest gift to mankind and if Bach was the ONLY music in the world it would still be that . |
| Post removed |
This is such a personal choice. If I guage this by what I actually listen to, Beethoven overwhelms this list for me. After Beethoven, I don't think I would have a ranked order, but neither Brahms nor Tchaikovksy would be in my top 5 - probably top 10, certainly. Mahler, Sibelius, Wagner, possibly Chopin, Haydn, Dvorak and others are top contenders. Curious about the person who posted Holst - I have a project on my to-do list to spend a bunch of time listening to Holst past the Planets. I have a handful of other recordings, but mostly he seems to be a one-hit wonder. I have heard of people owning 30+ recordings of the Planets and no other Holst. |
For top 5 I would include the five who had the greatest effect on the musicians who followed after them. If you take out any of my five recommendations, most likely every single 20th century classical writers output would be impacted. The one who stood at the epicenter of music development was Bach. His works are mathematical perfection.He is the only Western composer whose works are considered as registering on the classical musical scale among the classical Indian musicians. (Musical theory, and instrument development in India has preceeded Western music by many centuries, so it's not a little accomplishment to be acclaimed and accepted by the East.)Before Bach people have not understood the mathematical background of music so profoundly, and after Bach, they overcomplicated things, and by doing that, they also took away from the mathematical balance that Bach has achieved. Western music history in a nutshell: striving towards perfection of harmony and balance, reaching it with Bach, then loosing it again by overcomplication since Bach. While Bach's works were lost soon after his death, many of his contemporaries were deeply affected by him - Handel, Haydn, Beethoven all were influenced by him, just as other musicians of his era.Mozart would be the second giant, with Beethoven and Haydn. Of these four, there's not doubt that they had a profound influence on Western classical music. Fifth would be.... well, hard to tell. There were so many after Beethoven and Haydn that it's impossible to pick on definitive giant who influenced everyone after him. I'd rather go back in time, to before Bach, and pick Claudio Monteverdi, a giant who made a huge turn on the wheel of music: polyphonic music, opera, and huge advances in form and melody. Without him, we would be still stuck at early Baroque, and there would not have been a Bach... So, I would recommend:Monteverdi,Bach,Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven. (In order of birth...)Top two, without shadow of a doubt, were Monteverdi and Bach - take them (or either of them) out of the picture and every other composers output would be drastically impacted. Contemporary music would be nothing like today. |
@kenrus -- Yeah, one of my favorite records is a l'oiseau-lyre two LP edition of Handel's "Acis & Galatea" featuring an in-her-prime Joan Sutherland, but I mostly just can't get behind the composer. For me, his stuff just feels too specifically targeted to the Upper Clahhhses. It lacks emotional power. It seems composed in a way to give an audience the okay to socialize and do business as it's being performed. |
Try as I might, I'll always admire JS Bach more than truly love the guy. Just like Brahms, his stuff often strikes my ears as more contrived than inspired. Either didactic or cranked out for a paycheck. It doesn't help that as the King (or whoever it was) told Mozart in the play Amadeus, there are just "too many notes." It's not that I haven't tried to give him his due, either. My record and CD shelves aren't exactly devoid of the dude. I dutifully toil through his Well Tempered Klavier on my piano. |
How is Haydn by default, not in the top 5? History suggests Mozart and Beethoven studied with Haydn. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papa_Haydn He was called "papa" for a reason. I would shoehorn Vivaldi in as well, since he was creating before all of them, the top 5 should be a top 6! |
Arguments as to who is the greatest composer are, of course, subjective. The composer who is the most meaningful to you is the “greatest.” For me it’s Beethoven, then Mozart, then Bach. Of course in the sheer volume of first rate compositions, Bach is probably the most prolific. But, to me, Beethoven, also by dint of volume, but also in the variety and scope of his masterpieces is the most meaningful. I don’t believe anyone reached higher in inspiration than Mozart, but his short existence on this earth limited him. |
It would be extremely difficult to speculate what Mozart would have done with more years; I would expect really great things, but, who knows? Based on early accomplishments, Korngold should have been a musical giant; he was good, but not that good. Given what he had done in his short life, particularly what he did in the last year or so of his life, I would say that Schubert's premature death was the biggest loss to the world of music. |
brownsfan, I agree with you about Bach. I was just raising an argument about what counts as greatness and whether influence of future composers can arguably be the main measure. I also agree with you about the greatness of the St. Matthaus Passion, although I might still favor the B Minor Mass. The only thing he didn't do was opera, but, his vocal works certainly show that he had what it took to do opera if he had thought it a worthy endeavor. |
@larryi I hear that comment about J.S. Bach being "stuck in the Baroque." In a sense it is true, in that he persisted writing High Baroque after everyone else had moved on. The reality is that while remaining true to the baroque style for 2 decades after everyone else began to move on, that late High Baroque music went to the pinnacle of western music. In that sense, he most certainly was not stuck anywhere. The Matthaus passion is the greatest piece of music ever written by a human being. If that is stuck, then give me more stuck. As for influence, while it is true that J.S. Bach's music was largely lost to the public until Mendelssohn reintroduced it to the public, it is not true that his work was unknown to the cognoscenti. His influence on Beethoven is well documented as is his influence on Mendelssohn. I'd argue that apart from Beethoven's early exposure to J.S., Beethoven would not have become the Beethoven he became in his maturity. Beethoven didn't get the late quartets and piano sonatas from Haydn or Mozart. For many of us, the music of J.S. Bach is the standard against which all music is judged. C.P.E. Bach? Not so much. |
Top five in what respects? If I had to pick the single greatest composer it would be J.S. Bach, but, in terms of influence on other composers, one could argue his son C.P.E. Bach was more influential (pioneer in early classical form) with dad sort of stuck in the baroque. I don't think Brahms was that influential either as a neoclassicist in the romantic period. For personal favorites, Schubert would easily be in the top five. I would hate to have to choose between the likes of Haydn, Shostakovich, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Verdi, Puccini, Tchaikovsky, Brahms, etc. for position outside of my top four: Bach, Beethoven, Mozart and Schubert. |
