# This is the music we like: examining the A la carte polls



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Regulars of course know that I've been posting a series of polls over the last several months, each listing 13 pieces of music and simply asking "Which of these works do you like?"

The most recent poll brought the total number of works past 2,000, so I thought this would be a good time to take stock and see what - if anything - it all means. I have my own observations but perhaps others wish to make comments or ask questions.

The full list of works voted on is here.
List of polls here.
All the works, sorted by popularity, here.
And a chronological list here.

As I said in many of the polls, the aim was to build a general picture of TC users' taste in music. One basic question I wanted to answer was, _just how popular is the most popular music, like Beethoven's symphonies?_. Another more specific one came on foot of the arguments over what should be included in the Post-1950 list - _what's the most popular music of the era, when you remove discussions about modernity and don't ask voters to rank one thing over another?_ KenOC's "most popular works by decade" was also an inspiration (and, for format, so were science's daily polls asking what he should listen to).

There are obvious flaws in any attempt to build a big picture from this mass of data, and I certainly don't claim to be able to say anything with total certainty. Although I've produced a leaderboard, there's no point in comparing, say, 10th place with 11th place, or 1000th place with 1,001st place - these differences are meaningless because they can be changed significantly by a single vote. But 10th versus 100th, or 1000th versus 2000th can tell us something. Broad-strokes trends are visible.

With your indulgence, I'll post a few findings that I think are interesting.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

For the sake of convenience, here's the top 30 on the leaderboard:

1. Beethoven: Symphony no.5 in C minor, op. 67
2. Beethoven: Symphony no.3 in E flat, op.55, 'Eroica'
3. Beethoven: Symphony no.7 in A, op.92
4. Beethoven: Symphony no.6 in F, op.86, 'Pastoral'
5. Beethoven: Symphony no.9 in D minor, op.125
6. Mahler: Symphony no.09
7. Mahler: Symphony no.06 in A minor
8. Mahler: Symphony no.04 in G
9. Bartók: Music for Strings, Percussion, and Celesta
10. Beethoven: Piano sonata no.08 in C minor, op.13, 'Pathétique'
11. Sibelius: Symphony no.5 in E flat, op.82
12. Dvořák: Symphony no.9 in E minor, op.95, 'From the New World'
13. Beethoven: Piano concerto no.4 in G, op.58
14. Mozart: Symphony no.40 in G minor, K 550
15. Beethoven: Piano concerto no.5 in E flat, op.73. 'Emperor'
16. Holst: The Planets
17. Bach: Goldberg Variations, BWV 988
18. Sibelius: Symphony no.7 in C, op.105
19. Mahler: Symphony no.01 in D
20. Mahler: Symphony no.02 in C minor, 'Resurrection'
21. Schubert: Symphony no.8 in B minor, D 759, 'Unfinished'
22. Tchaikovsky: Symphony no.5 in E minor, op.64
23. Beethoven: Piano sonata no.23 in F minor, op. 57, 'Appassionata'
24. Rimsky-Korsakov: Scheherazade, op.35
25. Mozart: String quartet no.19 in C, K. 465, 'Dissonance'
26. Mendelssohn: Symphony no.4 in A, op.90, 'Italian'
27. Sibelius: Symphony no.2 in D, op.43
28. Brahms: Symphony no.4 in E minor, op.98
29. Mahler: Symphony no.05
30. Berg: Violin concerto

Of 2,007 works, just 115 were liked by at least two-thirds of voters, while 1,166 were liked by fewer than one-third of voters. In fact only 457 works were liked by at least half of voters.

This has quite a bit of significance, I think, for some of the "self-evident" claims made on TC about certain composers or works. There's no such thing as a piece of music that everyone likes, and a substantial majority of music is "unpopular" rather than "popular".


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Nereffid said:


> There's no such thing as a piece of music that everyone likes, and a substantial majority of music is "unpopular" rather than "popular".


Or unheard rather than heard.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

GreenMamba said:


> Or unheard rather than heard.


Yes, I mean "popular" in the combined sense of known + liked.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

My first thought is that TC members don't like Bach works as much as I would have expected based on his number 1 position in just about every poll we've done here. Bach had 2 works in the top 50, but Beethoven, Mozart, Mahler, and Sibelius all had 5 or more. Schubert had 3. I guess the top 50 is not necessarily a good indicator of how liked a composer is. I suppose we could do a weighted sum of the top 1000 and see what that finds, but that would be more for math and data nerds like myself. 

Thanks, Nereffid, for all this work. The results are interesting to ponder, and I agree that some reasonable conclusions can be drawn.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

People like symphonies, and JSB didn't write them. Favorite works of his are probably more dipsersed: some like the masses and cantatas, some solo keyboard, etc.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

It always amazes me, even in such a specialized field as CM, with the few passionate adherents it claims, that there can be so much disagreement about favourites.

I recall feeling the same amazement when I was in my 20s. I had a clique of close friends, all of us heavily into the then contemporary composers and avantgarde rock bands of the time. We used to buy and play the same albums, but when I asked one or the other friend which were his favourite pieces or songs, they were invariably not the ones that were my favourites. How could we share the same very specialized music, but not favour exactly the same piece or song from each? The pieces I found somewhat lacking or the duds on the rock albums were the ones my friends preferred  We shared so much and, yet, when it came down to pinpointing exactly what it was that we liked, we didn't share anything at all!


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Pop culture is that way: people have wildly different tastes. 

I've often thought that's a problem with Classical and other "high" art forms. You are sometimes given the impression that the Great Works are known, and your job is simply to appreciate them. How dull.

One of the main things I'd stress is that there's a huge world out there in which you can find your own tastes.


----------



## Faustian (Feb 8, 2015)

There are a wide range of genres and forms, and while individual listeners gravitate in particular directions, it seems that the symphony is kind of like the lowest common denominator among most classical music listeners.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Nereffid said:


> For the sake of convenience, here's the top 30 on the leaderboard:
> 
> 1. Beethoven: Symphony no.5 in C minor, op. 67
> 2. Beethoven: Symphony no.3 in E flat, op.55, 'Eroica'
> ...


I'm struck by the fact that I love all of those pieces, but my top thirty looks *substantially* different. For starters, in my mind there's a gaping lack of vocal works there. I had figured, no, knew full well that instrumental works are more popular here, but I hadn't figured that there wouldn't be a single vocal work in the top 30 (no, folks, Beethoven's 9th doesn't count, you know what I mean ), especially given that there are some gigantically appraised war horses that absolutely rate the top ten depending on the group you're polling; I guess we're patently not that group.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

There is certainly a big divide between the opera folks and others. Obviously many of us like both, but opera people (the technical term) generally don't take part in many of the lists we do so opera tends to fair less well.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

mmsbls said:


> There is certainly a big divide between the opera folks and others. Obviously many of us like both, but opera people (the technical term) generally don't take part in many of the lists we do so opera tends to fair less well.


That, and sacred music, lieder, etc. used to be enormously popular in the CM crowd, but here and elsewhere it seems to be falling off the side of the planet. How many millennials, say, twenty years from now, will be humming The Trout or mouthing "sicut locutus est" on the bus?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Nereffid said:


> Of 2,007 works, just 115 were liked by at least two-thirds of voters, while 1,166 were liked by fewer than one-third of voters. In fact only 457 works were liked by at least half of voters.
> 
> This has quite a bit of significance, I think, for some of the "self-evident" claims made on TC about certain composers or works. There's no such thing as a piece of music that everyone likes, and a substantial majority of music is "unpopular" rather than "popular".


Nereffid, I salute you for the robust demonstration of both curiosity and industry in your compilation and publishing of these lists! A couple of thoughts/questions: A) Is it false or true to conclude that the first 115 selections on your list are the 115 that were liked by at least two-thirds of the voters? B) Do you have actual vote counts for each selection? If so, could you republish the list showing the actual vote count for each piece? These data could help us better understand what the list is telling us.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

The list of works sorted by popularity linked to above has the vote counts. For example, Beethoven Symphony No. 5 (#1 on list) got 52 likes out of 57 voters.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Nereffid, I salute you for the robust demonstration of both curiosity and industry in your compilation and publishing of these lists! A couple of thoughts/questions: A) Is it false or true to conclude that the first 115 selections on your list are the 115 that were liked by at least two-thirds of the voters? B) Do you have actual vote counts for each selection? If so, could you republish the list showing the actual vote count for each piece? These data could help us better understand what the list is telling us.


A. Almost true, but not quite! I introduce a small weighting factor that reduces the score for works in polls with relatively few voters. It's arbitrary, and I'm not totally satisfied with it, but I wanted some way to reflect widely differing voter numbers (Should 20 votes from 40 voters be regarded as equivalent to 40 votes from 80 voters? Simple maths means the former is a more volatile score). As it happens, the 115 works liked by at least two-thirds are in the top 117 (#109 and #110 both liked by 66.13%, which is as close as dammit).

B. The lists on the Google Sites pages have the number of votes and voters alongside each work.


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

I like almost every work on that list a lot (and the one I don't like a lot is tolerable) and it is the type of list that could be easily anticipated - heavy bias towards symphonies, mainly within a 150 year period, geographically concentrated on the Austro-Hungarian empire. 

Interesting confirmation of what many of us might expect.

Good work, Nerrefid


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

mmsbls said:


> My first thought is that TC members don't like Bach works as much as I would have expected based on his number 1 position in just about every poll we've done here. Bach had 2 works in the top 50, but Beethoven, Mozart, Mahler, and Sibelius all had 5 or more. Schubert had 3. I guess the top 50 is not necessarily a good indicator of how liked a composer is. I suppose we could do a weighted sum of the top 1000 and see what that finds, but that would be more for math and data nerds like myself.


Though he might not have many works in the top flight - as GreenMamba said, it's dominated by symphonies - Bach has a very solid catalogue. A quick scan of my spreadsheet to examine the % score achieved by composers' 20th-most popular work (arbitrary choice!) puts Bach narrowly behind Beethoven and Mozart, and there don't seem to be many other composers in contention.

ETA: I don't have time now, but tomorrow I hope to have some analysis of how the most-popular works are distributed over the historical periods. Plus an attempt to investigate the modernist/anti-modernist divide!


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

I am surprised Mahler was that popular.
I have never heard the Planets and still it is on place 17.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Sloe said:


> I am surprised Mahler was that popular.
> I have never heard the Planets and still it is on place 17.


I get the feeling that the Planets would not even be in that ballpark if the demographic were people that are 40+. And in saying that I don't mean to deride the work at all. Does it bother me that the Planets is up there and a monumental, historically significant encyclopedia of different traditions of sacred music like the Mass in B isn't even close? A little bit...


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2016)

Nereffid said:


> Regulars of course know that I've been posting a series of polls over the last several months, each listing 13 pieces of music and simply asking "Which of these works do you like?"
> 
> The most recent poll brought the total number of works past 2,000, so I thought this would be a good time to take stock and see what - if anything - it all means. I have my own observations but perhaps others wish to make comments or ask questions.
> 
> ...


You deserve a medal. Or medication.
Possibly both.
But Many Thanks!!!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Am I correct in concluding that the largest single universe in any poll was 82 respondents? Also, am I correct that the largest universe of Like voters for any one piece is 65? And also is it known how many different voters responded throughout the entire series of polls? I ask because it may be important if the series of polls sampled a constantly or occasionally varying population of voters. I am not a statistician, but, again, it may help us to better appreciate these results.


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2016)

mmsbls said:


> There is certainly a big divide between the opera folks and others. Obviously many of us like both, but opera people (the technical term) generally don't take part in many of the lists we do so opera tends to fair less well.


Why might that be?.....


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2016)

dogen said:


> Why might that be?.....


From what I can tell, the opera subforum is the only category that attracts users that isolate themselves to said subforum. For instance, never before had it even been questioned that the TC lists would be compiled in the general forum, but when we got around to operas, round 2, you saw a lot of "Why isn't this in the opera forum? [I don't go to the other forums]". As for why? Well, they're a queer bunch, aren't they...


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2016)

Lukecash12 said:


> I'm struck by the fact that I love all of those pieces, but my top thirty looks *substantially* different.


I love 28 of these top 30, and my top 30 looks substantially different, but I am in no way struck by this fact.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Dunno about the rest of you dudes, but I clicked on works I knew and liked. Favorites wold be a different - and much smaller - bunch of clicks.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Me, too. In fact, I even clicked like for works I had heard by composers I like at lot; and works that are on albums by composers I like a lot. I do, after all generally like all of the albums I've bought and I generally like almost anything by the composers I like a lot—but many of these works would not necessarily be favourites.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I clicked on works I had never heard by composers I had never heard of, but whose names had two or more letters in common with the names of composers I like.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Am I correct in concluding that the largest single universe in any poll was 82 respondents? Also, am I correct that the largest universe of Like voters for any one piece is 65?


Yes on both counts. And the smallest number of respondents in any poll was 35.



Strange Magic said:


> And also is it known how many different voters responded throughout the entire series of polls? I ask because it may be important if the series of polls sampled a constantly or occasionally varying population of voters. I am not a statistician, but, again, it may help us to better appreciate these results.


In theory, I could keep track of every single voter but that would be insanely time-consuming. So I can only give ballpark figures.
Comparison of one early and one late poll, one with 47 voters and the other with 46, revealed that the two polls had 25 voters in common - meaning 43 voters who only voted in one.
At a guess I'd say there's a core of 20-30 people who have voted in most of the polls, probably the same number or a bit higher who have voted in quite a few polls, and then maybe 40-80 (total guess) who have voted in a small number of polls. The total number of people who've voted is, I assume, well over 100.

With such variation it's arguable that I can't compare polls at all. But the results seem to show a believable consistency. And there have been a few occasions where I've accidentally included the same work twice, and the results are helpful.
Chopin: Scherzo no.3 got 50.94% in poll 16, and 43.98% in poll 22. (53 and 46 voters, respectively)
Debussy: Pelléas et Mélisande got 51.72% in poll 27, and 55.56% in poll 121. (58 and 54 voters)
Mozart: Piano concerto no.20 got 68.97% in poll 27, and 71.95% in poll 52. (58 and 82 voters)
These figures imply that different voting populations produce roughly similar results, and perhaps that a less-popular work's score is more variable. 
The change in Debussy's fortunes corresponds to about 60 places on the leaderboard, which isn't much in a 2,000-strong list.

Certainly, the more people who vote in a poll, the more representative of the general TC population the results are. So *I continue to encourage everyone to vote in polls they've missed*.

One other thing - the regular voters are a mixed bunch; some of them vote for most of the works in each poll, and some vote for few or none. But I've noticed, when rechecking old polls every few weeks, that people who vote late (several days or weeks after the poll opened) tend to vote for a small number of works - and often it's the works that are more popular. The ones who vote for more works tend to be the ones who respond to the poll the day it appears. I don't think this has any particular significance other than to suggest that people who are most active on TC might have a broader taste in music than people who are less active.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Nereffid said:


> Yes on both counts...


I suspect you could refine the results forever without too much change in the results.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

> Nereffid, I salute you for the robust demonstration of both curiosity and industry in your compilation and publishing of these lists!


I second this part :tiphat:


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Lukecash12 said:


> I get the feeling that the Planets would not even be in that ballpark if the demographic were people that are 40+.


I don't follow the logic of this comment at all.

Holst's _The Planets_ is a very well-known work in the UK and has been for many decades (in fact, from the time of its premiere) and there are buckets of admired performances. If anything, I would expect it to be *more* popular with those over 40 rather than less so. Clearly, I would anticipate that it could be less popular in other countries.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

*The modernist/anti-modernist divide.*

I've been trying to play devil's advocate to see if there's a way to spin the poll data to give one "side" dominance over the other, and I just can't find one.

Poll #24 looked like a good candidate for study because it's got some old classics - piano concertos by Brahms, Mozart, and Rachmaninov - as well as some modernist works from the likes of Cage and Xenakis.

The basic finding is - if we say there's 5 "modern" and 8 "not-modern" works in the poll - that people who vote for modern music tend to also vote for some not-modern music, and people who vote for not-modern music tend to vote for some modern music. The latter is not such a strong tendency, but it can be argued that the results are skewed anyway by the fact that the older works are not merely better-liked but also better-known.

So let's compare the works by Cage, Poulenc, Saint-Saëns, Schnittke and Xenakis, which all got 19-22 votes. The basic result _there_ is that when we pit any one of those versus any other one, roughly the same proportions appear: 19-21% of people like both, 14-19% like A but not B, 14-19% like B but not A, and 43-48% like neither. There's some outliers - the Saint-Saëns/Xenakis match-up is more divisive, while the 3 modernist works tend to be liked together - but it's the same basic pattern. The best you can say is some people like modernist music, some people like non-modernist music, some people like both, and some people are uncommitted (presumably through simply having heard fewer works generally).

A three-way between the Mozart, Cage and Saint-Saëns pieces is fun.
17% of people don't like any of them. 29% like Mozart only. 16% like all three. M + C but not S is 12%, M + S but not C is 16%. 2% (one person) likes the Cage and Saint-Saëns but not the Mozart.

Bottom line: *We are a diverse group of listeners.*


----------



## Guest (Feb 5, 2016)

What about those that use randomising algorithms to determine their voting?! Or has he left?....


----------



## Stavrogin (Apr 20, 2014)

Nereffid said:


> *The modernist/anti-modernist divide.*
> 
> I've been trying to play devil's advocate to see if there's a way to spin the poll data to give one "side" dominance over the other, and I just can't find one.
> 
> ...


I suggest you use that last sentence as your go-to line for when data don't suggest anything relevant! :lol:


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

What an interesting study! Thank you for all the hard work in putting this together!


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

As mentioned in the OP, I've listed the most popular works in each decade (or, for pre-1700, broader periods) here.

Clearly some decades contain more works that are popular, compared with other decades. So we can look at some figures in graph form. This is real nerd territory!

Let me add the caveat here - which is implicit in everything I say about the results of these polls - that the polls only measure what is _both known and liked_. They say _nothing_ about such debatable concepts as greatness.









The above graph plots three things by decade:
The blue line shows the _average percentage_ scored by works composed in that decade.
The red line shows the percentage achieved by the 10th-most popular work in that decade.
The yellow line, which uses the right-hand axis, shows the number of voted-on works from that decade.

The peaks and troughs on the blue and red lines correspond to things we might suspect already. Things are quiet until Bach comes along. The mid-18th-century trough comes between Bach and Haydn. The 1780s-1800s peak can be attributed to Mozart, Beethoven and Haydn. And so on.
There's a clear decline from the beginning of the 20th century that accelerates in the 1970s. That recent music should be less popular (known and liked) than early music that has already stood the test of time shouldn't be surprising, and it should go without saying that this finding says nothing about whether any music is good or bad.

But shouldn't that yellow line be flat?
Ideally, it should if we want to really see how decades compare with each other. Take Beethoven out of the 1800s, for instance, and there's not much left, but take Mahler out of the 1900s and the averages will stay high. But that would mean several hundred more polls to even things out, and besides, the red line wouldn't change much because most of the expectedly popular works have already been voted on.

So, rather than _averages_ we can also just look at _how many_ works achieved a certain level of popularity, which is this graph:









Here the blue line is the number of works per decade (same as the yellow line in the previous graph).
The red line is the number of works that were liked by at least one-quarter of voters.
The green line is the number of works liked by at least half of voters.

The green line indicates that our favourite time periods - the decades containing a relatively high number of works that a lot of us like - are the 1780s to 1830s and the 1870s to 1940s. The early 20th century seems to be the most favoured time of all.

What's the dashed yellow line? It's quite similar to the red line, which is a very pleasing result for me. It corresponds to the number of works from each decade that are listed in the book _1001 Classical recordings you must hear before you die_. So, a publication that has nothing to do with these polls gives a similar picture - a nice confirmation that what I've produced isn't arbitrary nonsense!


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

...but there's no Sir Peter Maxwell Davies!!!


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> ...but there's no Sir Peter Maxwell Davies!!!


Yes there is: _An Orkney Wedding, with Sunrise_ - you voted for it!

I'm not sure if it would prove to be his most popular work, but there it is at no.1481, in between Verdi's _Nabucco_ and Hosokawa's horn concerto.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Headphone Hermit said:


> I don't follow the logic of this comment at all.
> 
> Holst's _The Planets_ is a very well-known work in the UK and has been for many decades (in fact, from the time of its premiere) and there are buckets of admired performances. If anything, I would expect it to be *more* popular with those over 40 rather than less so. Clearly, I would anticipate that it could be less popular in other countries.


No doubt it's a regional thing. Where I live it is mostly people in their 20's and 30's that love _The Planets_. That and strangely it is becoming wildly popular with band kids in high school  I liked _The Planets_ a lot in high school, and of course I still like it now, but the other band kids wouldn't have been into doing it.

The logic behind my previous comment was simply that Holst's piece is way up top, and the Mass in B, which has been a warhorse for well longer and possesses a whole mountain of recordings, isn't higher than _The Planets_?


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

The Planets is hugely popular in the US and has been for decades, so I'm not sure band or age has that much impact.

I think the perplexing ranking of Bach could just be his proliferation. Whereas later composers may have extensive catalogs, many seem to pale in comparison to Bach's (Haydn perhaps being an exception). So with so few voters it wouldn't take many like me to not vote for several of the cantatas, not having heard them, to skew the results. I didn't vote for them if I didn't know them, even though I knew I would like anything and everything by Bach. It didn't feel proper.

On the other hand there is a small but vociferous contingent who are anti-sewing machine music on TC, which doesn't bother me at all. We are here to discuss our likes and dislikes after all.


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

It's interesting to note that only five of Nereffid's top 30 were works for chamber ensemble or solo piano. Also that only one Mozart symphony and none of Haydn's appeared, and no work written before written 1785.


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

Massive thanks to Nereffid for this most interesting effort! We are a diverse group of listeners, where diversity means not only taste, but also level of ignorance!


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

My guess is there would be more representation of vocal works if these polls had been cross-posted in Opera; while I frequent both the CM and Opera areas, I do notice that they tend to be insular.

But this is a heroic effort and I salute Nereffid's working through all of this.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Xaltotun said:


> Massive thanks to Nereffid for this most interesting effort! We are a diverse group of listeners, where diversity means not only taste, but also level of ignorance!


But in a good way. 500 years of music is a lot to become familiar with!


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Nereffid said:


> *The modernist/anti-modernist divide.*
> 
> I've been trying to play devil's advocate to see if there's a way to spin the poll data to give one "side" dominance over the other, and I just can't find one.
> 
> ...


I realize that this is a subjective impression rather than hard data, but my impression is that a lot of people voted in these polls who don't speak up very loudly in the anti-/modernist debates, which are dominated by perhaps a dozen posters.

Also, the anti-/modernist debates aren't usually about whether we should enjoy baroque, classical, or romantic era music, but whether we should reject modern_ist_ music. Even among those dozen or so, one side loves to point out that they enjoy some of the music of the past, oh, sixty years, but it (at the extreme, Alma Deutscher or that Italian violin concerto guy) is not the music that the modernists promote; the other side loves to point out that they enjoy music of other eras as well.

So the issue in those debates is something other than what we like; it's _what our attitudes should be toward people who like or don't like modernism_. The one side is always implying that there is something wrong with people who happen not to enjoy modernist music, the other side is always implying that there is something wrong with people who do. Of course for various reasons, not least the terms of service, the arguments have to be cleverer and subtler than that, but really that's just ornamentation.


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2016)

What the heck is sewing machine music?


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

dogen said:


> What the heck is sewing machine music?


Mechanical baroque music.


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2016)

Dim7 said:


> Mechanical baroque music.


Oh, cheers. Maybe I'll have a listen to some pieces by Isaac Singer.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

It's a mystery to me why Mahler is so well represented. He is good but there are so many other things I value over his limited output and sometimes emotionally exhausting style(I find Bruckner sits with me better over the long haul).


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Dim7 said:


> Mechanical baroque music.


Yes but opinions on what is mechanical vary. Some go so far as to call Bach keyboard music, Handel Concerti Grossi, or Scarlatti Sonatas sewing machine music, while others like me readily percieve intuition, wit, or depth in many Telemann overtures, almost all Geminiani Conceri Grossi, and some Stamitz symphonies. But even I will consider some as sewing machine music, maybe Abel symphonies, Manfredini Concerti Grossi, some obscure Vivaldi Concerti(though there is often a spark of inspiration in the many sequences of these works), or one of the lesser keyboard Sonatas of Carlos Seixas. And this is not to say I still won't listen to them and even enjoy them. I can enjoy them both in context as examples of a style that only one given composer in history was able to do by virtue of being themselves and highly competent, And out of context in more musically receptive states of mind where expectations are less grandiose and extraneous knowledge is not required and even avoided.


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

science said:


> The one side is always implying that there is something wrong with people who happen not to enjoy modernist music, the other side is always implying that there is something wrong with people who do. Of course for various reasons, not least the terms of service, the arguments have to be cleverer and subtler than that, but really that's just ornamentation.


Is it not the case that there are some of us who repeatedly say that "it is OK to like what you like"?

Is it not the case that there are some of us who deplore the argument that 'all modern music (or art) is rubbish' without negating the right to hold the opinion that "I don't like X (or y or even, z)"?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

science said:


> So the issue in those debates is something other than what we like; it's _what our attitudes should be toward people who like or don't like modernism_. The one side is always implying that there is something wrong with people who happen not to enjoy modernist music, the other side is always implying that there is something wrong with people who do. Of course for various reasons, not least the terms of service, the arguments have to be cleverer and subtler than that, but really that's just ornamentation.


I personally don't mean to imply that there is something wrong with those who do not enjoy modernist music.

I think that it is wrong to say that the music is intrinsically unenjoyable or unnatural or tuneless, but if people don't like it, that's their prerogative.


----------



## pjang23 (Oct 8, 2009)

Lukecash12 said:


> No doubt it's a regional thing. Where I live it is mostly people in their 20's and 30's that love _The Planets_. That and strangely it is becoming wildly popular with band kids in high school  I liked _The Planets_ a lot in high school, and of course I still like it now, but the other band kids wouldn't have been into doing it.
> 
> The logic behind my previous comment was simply that Holst's piece is way up top, and the Mass in B, which has been a warhorse for well longer and possesses a whole mountain of recordings, isn't higher than _The Planets_?


The biggest factor for The Planets' strong showing is that every vote is worth the same. If you really really love a work (compared to just liking it a little), there's no way to adjust the weight of your vote, and the effect of this is that very well-known works and popular genres score the highest.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Headphone Hermit said:


> Is it not the case that there are some of us who repeatedly say that "it is OK to like what you like"?
> 
> Is it not the case that there are some of us who deplore the argument that 'all modern music (or art) is rubbish' without negating the right to hold the opinion that "I don't like X (or y or even, z)"?


I don't understand the second question, but as to the first, I believe we are by far the majority in the world and probably the almost silent majority here on this site. "Almost silent" because our voices get drowned out (in my perception) by the much more notable shouting of the two sides.


----------



## Autocrat (Nov 14, 2014)

Great work Nereffid.

One question: _Scheherazade?_ Really?


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Autocrat said:


> Great work Nereffid.
> 
> One question: _Scheherazade?_ Really?


Why not it is a beautiful work that most users have heard. Not strange that it is popular.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

The biggest surprises for me are the Beethoven PC 4 rating higher than the "Emperor" and the inclusion of the Berg VC. The latter is a nice work and very moving at times. I'm just surprised it would be that popular based on my own prior avoidance of composers associated with modernists, even accessible works by them.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

science said:


> I realize that this is a subjective impression rather than hard data, but my impression is that a lot of people voted in these polls who don't speak up very loudly in the anti-/modernist debates, which are dominated by perhaps a dozen posters.
> 
> Also, the anti-/modernist debates aren't usually about whether we should enjoy baroque, classical, or romantic era music, but whether we should reject modern_ist_ music. Even among those dozen or so, one side loves to point out that they enjoy some of the music of the past, oh, sixty years, but it (at the extreme, Alma Deutscher or that Italian violin concerto guy) is not the music that the modernists promote; the other side loves to point out that they enjoy music of other eras as well.
> 
> So the issue in those debates is something other than what we like; it's _what our attitudes should be toward people who like or don't like modernism_. The one side is always implying that there is something wrong with people who happen not to enjoy modernist music, the other side is always implying that there is something wrong with people who do. Of course for various reasons, not least the terms of service, the arguments have to be cleverer and subtler than that, but really that's just ornamentation.


It would take too much time to properly examine the data (ie, about which posters voted for which works) to produce a clear answer on these sorts of questions.
But certainly there are a lot of poll voters who don't get involved in the anti-/modernist arguments, or even contribute much to discussions generally.
Based on looking at a few polls more deeply, it seems to me that, among the people who like a wide range of music, the proportion of people who _do_ get involved in such arguments is quite high. Which suggests at its simplest that being enthusiastic about a wide range of music means you're more likely to want to talk a lot. 
Interestingly, a few of the less subtle anti-modernists don't show an interest in the polls.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

pjang23 said:


> The biggest factor for The Planets' strong showing is that every vote is worth the same. If you really really love a work (compared to just liking it a little), there's no way to adjust the weight of your vote, and the effect of this is that very well-known works and popular genres score the highest.


Well, the polls are trying to identify the works that are well-known and liked, so yeah, I'd hope that would be the outcome.

And yes, every vote is worth the same: and every person's vote is worth the same as every other person's. So the person who has only heard a handful of works is worth the same as the person with a musicology degree and a collection of 50,000 albums, and the person who thinks Beethoven is pretty good is worth the same as the person who thinks Beethoven is the most awesomest awesomeness ever.

It's a bit of a paradox that, though asking people _not_ to rank works, I can nevertheless produce a ranked list. I wouldn't get too hung up on _why_ one work ranks higher than the other. I was more interested in addressing an issue such as - you may personally believe that, say, Bach's Mass in B minor is vastly superior to Holst's Planets, and you may have all the expert analysis to back you up, but ultimately more people like the Holst than like the Bach. And still, two-thirds of people like the Bach, which is a very large number (94% of works are less popular!).


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

science said:


> I don't understand the second question .....


Regarding _"Is it not the case that there are some of us who deplore the argument that 'all modern music (or art) is rubbish' without negating the right to hold the opinion that "I don't like X (or y or even, z)"?_ .... I think that there are many of us who accept that an individual is welcome to say "I don't like Ravel's _Scheherazade_" but on the other hand, we might criticise an individual who might make a sweeping judgement such as "all modern art is rubbish"

"I don't like Ravel's _Scheherazade_" implies that the individual has heard the piece and doesn't like it (and possibly can give some reasons why). It is reasonable to assume that the author has heard it and given it a chance before making the statement

"all modern music is rubbish" denegrates the whole of an art form in insulting terms. It is reasonable to assume that the author is not familiar with all modern music and therefore they have not given it chance before making the statement.

I hope that makes my post clearer :tiphat:


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Headphone Hermit said:


> Regarding _"Is it not the case that there are some of us who deplore the argument that 'all modern music (or art) is rubbish' without negating the right to hold the opinion that "I don't like X (or y or even, z)"?_ .... I think that there are many of us who accept that an individual is welcome to say "I don't like Ravel's _Scheherazade_" but on the other hand, we might criticise an individual who might make a sweeping judgement such as "all modern art is rubbish"
> 
> "I don't like Ravel's _Scheherazade_" implies that the individual has heard the piece and doesn't like it (and possibly can give some reasons why). It is reasonable to assume that the author has heard it and given it a chance before making the statement
> 
> ...


Yes, it does. I should've been able to figure that out!

Anyway, my answer from the previous post applies just the same to this question. Such individuals - definitely the majority of people in the world and perhaps the majority on this site - are _on this site_ usually drowned out by the louder voices that would have us choose one ideology or the other.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

The top 30 is not my top 30, but there's enough intersection for it to be gratifying. The only really surprising (to me) result is the appearance of _three _Sibelius symphonies -- but maybe that represents my era. Beethoven's Third as his second most popular symphony, and his G major over E-flat piano concerto affirm either my own taste, or everyone else's 

Thank you so much for undertaking this!


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

The high scores achieved by the Sibelius symphonies _might_ be partly due to the fact that I held two Sibelius-only polls: that might have introduced a little bias in terms of who chose to respond. But on the other hand, music of Sibelius's time is the most popular here.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Nereffid said:


> The high scores achieved by the Sibelius symphonies _might_ be partly due to the fact that I held two Sibelius-only polls: that might have introduced a little bias in terms of who chose to respond. But on the other hand, music of Sibelius's time is the most popular here.


Aside from the big names, which composers had the most individual titles inserted in the polls? From period to period I noticed certain composers simply had more entries, and I realize that is obviously an inescapable occurrence in your process.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Lukecash12 said:


> Aside from the big names, which composers had the most individual titles inserted in the polls? From period to period I noticed certain composers simply had more entries, and I realize that is obviously an inescapable occurrence in your process.


Mozart 74
Beethoven 69
Bach 62
Schubert 60
Brahms 48
Haydn 48
Schumann 35
Sibelius 31
Shostakovich 30
Dvorak 28
Chopin 27
Mendelssohn 26
Prokofiev 26
Tchaikovsky 26
Liszt 25
Bartók 24
Debussy 24
Handel 24
Rachmaninoff 24
Schoenberg 21
Ravel 20
Stravinsky 20

It's a difficult balance, because while I want to cover as much variety as possible, I've also found that too many less-well-known works in a poll tend to reduce the number of voters. And also, if I want to have roughly equal coverage of all time periods, I'm restricted to a smaller number of likely candidates in certain periods.


----------

