# Is Mussorgsky the worst of the famous composers?



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

A notorious drunk
Very small output
Only one opera, _Boris Godunov_, has joined the standard repertoire
Pretty much failed to complete any other large-scale projects including the operas _Khovanshchina_ and _The Fair at Sorochyntsi. _Such works had to be completed by others.
His most famous works are the orchestral re-writes with "corrections" by Stokowski, Ravel, Shostakovitch, Rimsky-Korsakov, and others.

Is there another composer who challenges him as the worst famous composer?


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Other than considering Boris Godunov one of the greatest operas ever written (pick your edition), no.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

I’d put Rimsky Korsakov, Carl Orff among those who I’d rank lower than Mussorgsky


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I have a soft spot for the music of Mussorgsky. It's too bad about his alcoholism but such is life.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

I certainly don’t get the “Pictures” hype whatsoever, but since I haven’t heard anything else from him I’ll suspend judgment until I hear more.


----------



## RICK RIEKERT (Oct 9, 2017)

Sir Karl Jenkins is Britain's best-selling living composer. His music has been called bland or trite by critics but is perhaps more accurately described by the composer himself as "accessible nonsense" which invariably represents "a vote of style over content".

1. Coffee drinker
2. Prolific composer - Jenkins has composed music for advertisement campaigns and has won the industry prize twice.
3. Only one opera, _Eloise_ (an opera for young people), which has not joined the standard repertoire.
4. Follows sport quite a lot (though he does not play anything): rugby, cricket, some foot*ball. 
5. His most famous works are the "Adiemus" album which started life as an advertising jingle for Delta Airlines, and has sold more than 3 million albums in 50 countries; and the anti-war oratorio _The Armed Man_ which has been performed almost 1,000 times. By the composer's reckoning, that works out to two performances a week, somewhere in the world. When told that _The Armed Man_ is performed much more often than Britten's _Requiem_, Sir Karl acknowledges that "the kind of people who go and watch Andrew Lloyd Webber, who go and watch a musical, would perhaps latch onto 'The Armed Man' where perhaps they wouldn't the 'War Requiem'."


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Karl Jenkins, man. I remember composing something like this when I was 10.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Is this the same Karl Jenkins who played saxophones and keyboards with Soft Machine in the 70s?


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

^
^

It is indeed.

Mussorgsky's instability and listlessness may have meant that so many works were left unfinished, but alcoholism and laziness weren't solely to blame - he also had a habit of working on at least two operas at a time, which left him spreading his inspiration far too thinly which hampered his progress, thus dulling his enthusiasm. I agree that the amount of completed work is slender, but _Boris Godunov_, _Night on Bald Mountain_, _Pictures at an Exhibition_ and about three hours worth of songs can only serve to remind us what he was actually capable of.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Nah, Mussorgsky was not the worst. There were thousands of composers worse than him in history.


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

I guess that for some, Boris isn't Good Enough! 

Hey, I know, let's take him out back and beat the whole tone scale out of him.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I certainly don't get the "Pictures" hype whatsoever, but since I haven't heard anything else from him I'll suspend judgment until I hear more.


My introduction to Mussorgsky's music was via *Emerson, Lake and Palmer's rendition of Pictures at an Exhibition*. Awesome work either way.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Couchie said:


> A notorious drunk
> Very small output





why anybody should care about these things evaluating his work?


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

starthrower said:


> Is this the same Karl Jenkins who played saxophones and keyboards with Soft Machine in the 70s?


Yes. Jenkins was the fourth best composer in Soft Machine, after Hugh Hopper, Mike Ratledge, and Alan Holdsworth.



Couchie said:


> A notorious drunk
> Very small output
> Only one opera, _Boris Godunov_, has joined the standard repertoire
> Pretty much failed to complete any other large-scale projects including the operas _Khovanshchina_ and _The Fair at Sorochyntsi. _Such works had to be completed by others.
> ...


Mussorgsky wasn't a professional composer, he was an amateur with another full-time career. Other major works include Sunless, Songs and Dances of Death, and Pictures at an Exhibition. Rimsky-Korsakoff butchered parts of Boris with his "corrections," including the wonderful metric irregularities in the opening music.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Couchie said:


> Only one opera, _Boris Godunov_, has joined the standard repertoire





Why is even whether a composer has written a single opera important?


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

Mussorgsky was a troubled man, with a really bad case of alcoholism, possibly underlined by some kind of depression or anxiety. Mussorgsky seemed to be one of those people who think differently than most. His mind and his creative impulses were by-and-large not aligned with anything that others around him were doing. Like Charles Ives in America, Mussorgsky had strong and unusual beliefs about music that others couldn't quite understand or even make sense of. Unlike Ives, who was able to realize his ideas, Mussorgsky lack of skill and ambition (and possibly mental stability) limited his output.

At best, Mussorgsky has a very powerful and thoroughly original voice. You hear this in "Boris Godunov" for sure. Even if Rimsky had to touch it up, Rimsky or any other composer could not have composed it by themselves, and "Boris" still stands as the greatest Russian opera, and possibly one of the greatest operas ever composed by anyone in the world. 

That in itself qualifies Mussorgsky as a great composer...

...and "Pictures at an Exhibition" is also wonderful in the Ravel or Stokowski version; the Ravel version was one of my very first introductions to classical music, and still a favorite.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

norman bates said:


> why anybody should care about these things evaluating his work?


I was thinking in words like that, well said .


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

You always see the same portrait of him on album covers and whatnot. That one where his hair is a mess and his nose is all ruddy and red. Poor guy. If you google images of Mussorsgky, there are much better, more presentable portraits that could be used.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

apricissimus said:


> You always see the same portrait of him on album covers and whatnot. That one where his hair is a mess and his nose is all ruddy and red. Poor guy. If you google images of Mussorsgky, there are much better, more presentable portraits that could be used.
> View attachment 135401


A casual bit of internet research indicates the painting is by his friend, Ilya Repin, shortly before Mussorgsky's death. Not altogether flattering, but intense, like Mussorgsky's musical vision. It gives insight into the composer's personality.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Mussorgsky was a genius which was unfortunately not allowed to fully blossom, for many reasons not the least of which was his drinking. So much of what he did was strikingly original. If only he had some professional training! A Night on Bald Mountain heard in his original orchestral version, not R-K's, is shocking and brutal.

Then there were lots of worst composers, but most who aren't famous. So depending on how you define "famous", he was towards the bottom based on the fact that he was unable to bring most of his music to completion in a performable form.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

He came in No. 36 in my survey tied with Strauss family (waltzers) and a point ahead of Monteverdi. To me people like Messiaen, Hindemith and Arthur Sullivan, who graded similarly, had similar output but did not have the one great hit comparable to Pictures At An Exhibition.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> ...So much of what [Mussorgsky] did was strikingly original. If only he had some professional training! A Night on Bald Mountain heard in his original orchestral version, not R-K's, is shocking and brutal...


...but there's the paradox, maybe. If Mussorgsky had the professional training, the technique, if he worked hard to sound "right" then maybe he wouldn't be Mussorgsky. Alcoholism aside, maybe he'd be some talented but uninteresting Russian composer of the 19th century who wrote competent but not outstanding music. Now you've got me interested in Mussorgsky's original version of Bald Mountain.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> ... A Night on Bald Mountain heard in his original orchestral version, not R-K's, is shocking and brutal...


I just heard Bald Mountain Mussorgsky original by Gergiev/BBC Synphony Orch. on YouTube.

Wow.

It's really different from Rimsky's "Rimkyfied" version, all smooth and beautiful with the quiet and holy resolve at the end.

Almost 40 years of classical music, and I'm still learning new things about my favorite composers; the gift that keeps giving.

Thank You.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

mbhaub said:


> Mussorgsky was a genius which was unfortunately not allowed to fully blossom, for many reasons not the least of which was his drinking. So much of what he did was strikingly original. If only he had some professional training! A Night on Bald Mountain heard in his original orchestral version, not R-K's, is shocking and brutal.
> 
> Then there were lots of worst composers, but most who aren't famous. So depending on how you define "famous", he was towards the bottom based on the fact that he was unable to bring most of his music to completion in a performable form.


I agree. Lack of professional training, alcoholism, and not enough time went against him, and his talent as a composer did not blossom as promised (he died way too young). But the trajectory pointed to something extraordinary that was only partially realized (besides Boris Godunov, Khovanshchina also demonstrates Mussorgsky's genius and daring vision).

So not the worst of the famous composers, but quite the opposite: a great might-have-been in the history of (Russian) music.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

One other thing: in the whole, wonderful, exciting repertoire created by the Might Five, one work stands out head and shoulders above everything else and is to my sensibilities the single most Russian sounding work ever. It's the Prelude to Khovanschina or Dawn over the Moscow River. Like much else Mussorgsky left it in rough draft and the loyal Rimsky-Korsakov created the standard version. If he had written nothing else, Mussorgsky will be remembered for this beautiful gift to the world.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> One other thing: in the whole, wonderful, exciting repertoire created by the Might Five, one work stands out head and shoulders above everything else and is to my sensibilities the single most Russian sounding work ever. It's the Prelude to Khovanschina or Dawn over the Moscow River. Like much else Mussorgsky left it in rough draft and the loyal Rimsky-Korsakov created the standard version. If he had written nothing else, Mussorgsky will be remembered for this beautiful gift to the world.


Another one of my favorites:

A friend once asked me to burn him a CD of music that sounds like a river or water moving. I think the program went as follows:

J. Strauss: "Blue Danube Waltz"
Smetana: "The Moldau"
Beethoven: "By the Brook" movement from Symphony #6 "Pastorale"
Wagner: "Siegfried's Rhine Journey" from "Siegfriend"
*Mussorgsky: "Dawn on the Moskva River" from "Khovantschina"*
Grofe: "Father of the Waters" from "Mississippi Suite"
Kern/Hammerstein: "Ol Man River" from "Showboat" (sung by William Warfield)
Copland/lyrics by Robert Lowry: "At the River" from "Old American Songs" (also sung by William Warfield)
Russian Folk Song: Volga Boatmen (Don Cossack Choir) 
Lu Whencheng: "Autumn Moon/Quiet Lake)

That places Mussorgsky in good company.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

EdwardBast said:


> Yes. Jenkins was the fourth best composer in Soft Machine, after Hugh Hopper, Mike Ratledge, and Alan Holdsworth.


That's some pretty stiff competition. But by that time the music had settled into fairly boring fusion vamps for endless soloing. I prefer the Wyatt era. I'd like to hear the original Mussorgsky orchestration for Bald Mountain. The famous version never struck me as being very provocative or violent. But rather tame for the mainstream.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

MarkW said:


> Other than considering Boris Godunov one of the greatest operas ever written (pick your edition), no.


Not to mention his songs, particularly the Songs and Dances of Death:


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Coach G said:


> Mussorgsky was a troubled man, with a really bad case of alcoholism, possibly underlined by some kind of depression or anxiety. Mussorgsky seemed to be one of those people whose think differently than most. His mind and his creative impulses were by-and-large not aligned with anything that others around him were doing. Like Charles Ives in America, Mussorgsky had strong and unusual beliefs about music that others couldn't quite understand or even make sense of. Unlike Ives, who was able to realize his ideas, Mussorgsky lack of skill and ambition (and possibly mental stability) limited his output.
> 
> At best, Mussorgsky has a very powerful and thoroughly original voice. You hear this in "Boris Godunov" for sure. Even if Rimsky had to touch it up, Rimsky or any other composer could not have composed it by themselves, and "Boris" still stands as the greatest Russian opera, and possibly one of the greatest operas ever composed by anyone in the world.
> 
> ...


Agree except I would say that RImsky *thought* he had to touch up Boris. As it is, Boris was revised by Mussorgsky, but it seems with a lot of pressure from his "friends." I prefer the original boris, though the Polish scene of the revision is great too. I'll keep the St. Basil Holy Fool scene over the Kromy Forest Holy Fool scene.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Compare the scores of the Mussorgsky original, in either version, with the R-K version and R-K did a lot more than "touch up". He essentially re-wrote the whole thing, scoring it in his usual orchestral magnificence. I grew up learning R-K's version, as we all did. When recordings of the original versions came out it was a shock. So familiar and yet so different.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> Compare the scores of the Mussorgsky original, in either version, with the R-K version and R-K did a lot more than "touch up". He essentially re-wrote the whole thing, scoring it in his usual orchestral magnificence. I grew up learning R-K's version, as we all did. When recordings of the original versions came out it was a shock. So familiar and yet so different.


OK, so now I have a homework assignment. I will try to find a Boris original online.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

wkasimer said:


> Not to mention his songs, particularly the Songs and Dances of Death:


Another one though, which has been scored into a more popular form by Shostakovitch.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

SixFootScowl said:


> Agree except I would say that RImsky *thought* he had to touch up Boris. As it is, Boris was revised by Mussorgsky, but it seems with a lot of pressure from his "friends." I prefer the original boris, though the Polish scene of the revision is great too. *I'll keep the St. Basil Holy Fool scene over the Kromy Forest Holy Fool scene*.


Me too. I saw a performance of the "original" version in Pittsburgh a couple of decades back. Magnificent and tighter than the long version.


----------



## sstucky (Apr 4, 2020)

I confess that I prefer Rimsky’s version of Boris to any of the originals. Guilty pleasure or whatever.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

It depends what you mean by 'famous'. He was more original than most composers and more influential than most, so in my view he was an above average composer. If you compare him to more middle of the road famous composers he is among the best, if you compare him to the biggest names, he is not as accomplished.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

elgars ghost said:


> ^
> ^
> 
> It is indeed.
> ...


Beethoven, Mozart, and Schubert, among others, worked on several works simultaneously. Didn't seem to hurt them any.
MM bigger problem was that he was largely self taught. Mozart and Bach were raised in such musical families that when they burped after being with with their wet nurse they did it in fugues with 3 voices. It is a lot easier for a genius to be very productive when making music is as natural as speaking


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Triplets said:


> Beethoven, Mozart, and Schubert, among others, worked on several works simultaneously. Didn't seem to hurt them any.
> MM bigger problem was that he was largely self taught. *Mozart and Bach were raised in such musical families that when they burped after being with with their wet nurse they did it in fugues with 3 voices.* It is a lot easier for a genius to be very productive when making music is as natural as speaking


I am tempted to make the bolded part my signature. :lol:


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Triplets said:


> _Beethoven, Mozart, and Schubert, among others, worked on several works simultaneously. Didn't seem to hurt them any._
> MM bigger problem was that he was largely self taught. Mozart and Bach were raised in such musical families that when they burped after being with with their wet nurse they did it in fugues with 3 voices. It is a lot easier for a genius to be very productive when making music is as natural as speaking


Sure, Triplets, many composers can but yet some can't. My point was that this way of working didn't suit Mussorgsky, especially in terms of a musical discipline like opera where hammering just the one into shape at any one time would have required a lot of planning, effort and inspiration, let alone tackling two or three together. But your point about Mussorgsky being self-taught is a crucial one - lack of formal training must have undermined further his ability to multi-task.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

elgars ghost said:


> Sure, Triplets, many composers can but yet some can't. My point was that this way of working didn't suit Mussorgsky, especially in terms of a musical discipline like opera where hammering just the one into shape at any one time would have required a lot of planning, effort and inspiration, let alone tackling two or three together. But your point about Mussorgsky being self-taught is a crucial one - lack of formal training must have undermined further his ability to multi-task.


My knowledge of MM is limited to what I have gleaned from liner and concert notes, but I was under the impression that some of his Opera music after being written ended up in works that were different from their original destination, particularly with respect to Sorotinsky Fair and Boris. Mahler wrote many movements that ended up in Symphonies different from the original plan. Beethoven and Schubert did a lot of cut and paste as well, particularly with Piano Sonatas and Quartets, and The Italian bel canto Opera Composers were (in)famous for this as well (Rossini, Donizetti, Bellini). And Beethoven found that working on very different pieces simultaneously (could any two works be more different than the Fifth and Sixth Symphonies? Hard to believe they were written together) could be refreshing to his muse.
I only raise these examples because as a non creative mind myself, I find it hard to critique the working method of those who are.
When I have to work on a project, I am a plodder, and I find it difficult to have to work on more than one at the same time-gotta finish A before moving on to B. Creative geniuses, otoh, might be different. They might have that inner voice that needs to be expressed, and then figure out how to organize what they have produced later.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Couchie said:


> Another one though, which has been scored into a more popular form by Shostakovitch.


Be thankful that it wasn't Rimsky...

Although I certainly prefer Mussorgsky's original Boris to Rimsky's, I love Shostakovich's orchestration of the S&DoD; there are other orchestrations that don't work as well. Shostakovich also re-orchestrated Boris - I recently "won" a copy of this on eBay, but haven't had a chance to sit and listen to it yet.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Boris Godunov is certainly one of the greatest operas ever written.

Then there are three song cycles, adding Sunless and The Nursery to the obvious, that can stand comparison with anything composed by the Great German song writers. Songs and Dances of Death remains a truly terrifying experience, even on the hundredth hearing. Dozens of other songs that are just wonderful too. I don't think there are finer songs in Russian from anyone.

There is plenty of great music in Khovanshchina, Sorochinsky Fair, Salammbo, even The Marriage, but they remain unpolished gems.

Oh, yes, there's that piano cycle that Ravel and others played with too.

Doesn't sound like a bad composer to me......


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I certainly don't get the "Pictures" hype whatsoever, but since I haven't heard anything else from him I'll suspend judgment until I hear more.


It's quite true that he . . .



> 4. Pretty much failed to complete any other large-scale projects including the operas Khovanshchina and The Fair at Sorochyntsi. Such works had to be completed by others.
> 5. His most famous works are the orchestral re-writes with "corrections" by Stokowski, Ravel, Shostakovitch, Rimsky-Korsakov, and others.


In spite of this, his status as one of "The Five" Russian composers (Mily *Balakirev* (the leader), César *Cui*, *Borodin, Mussorgsky*, and *Rimsky-Korsokov*) is solid. Promote "Russian" music. That, he did. He was an innovator, and contributed greatly to music with a Russian Musical identity. He often used inspiration from Russian folkore and history.

*Your Mussorgsky listening list*:

Of course, *Pictures at an Exhibition*
and
*Night on Bald Mountain
Boris Godounov*
*Songs and Dances of Death* [song cycle]
*The Capture of Kars*
*Iisus Navin* (aka Joshua)	
*Sunless* [song cycle]

Yeah, a lot of unfinished operas. A lot of songs. His Opus numbers only go up to 12.

He really _could_ have been _something_. He _could_ have been a contender.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Rimsky-Korsakov wrote that Mussorgsky's scores included:
_"absurd, disconnected harmony, ugly part-writing, sometimes strikingly illogical modulation, sometimes a depressing lack of it, unsuccessful scoring of orchestral things... what was needed at the moment was an edition for performance, for practical artistic aims, for familiarization with his enormous talent, not for the study of his personality and artistic transgressions."_

Tchaikovsky, in a letter to his patroness Nadezhda von Meck, was also critical of Mussorgsky:
_"Mussorgsky you very rightly call a hopeless case. In talent he is perhaps superior to all the [other members of The Five], but his nature is narrow-minded, devoid of any urge towards self-perfection, blindly believing in the ridiculous theories of his circle and in his own genius. In addition, he has a certain base side to his nature which likes coarseness, uncouthness, roughness. He flaunts his illiteracy, takes pride in his ignorance, mucks along anyhow, blindly believing in the infallibility of his genius. Yet he has flashes of talent which are, moreover, not devoid of originality."_


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

janxharris said:


> Why is even whether a composer has written a single opera important?


It's why Beethoven will never amount to much.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

amfortas said:


> It's why Beethoven will never amount to much.


Yeah, took him about 10 years to finish one opera, and if he had been hitting the bottle like Mussorgsky, he might not have even finished that.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

pianozach said:


> ...
> 
> *Your Mussorgsky listening list*:
> 
> ...


If that's all there is and Mussorgsky composed only 12, then his hit-to-miss ratio is outstanding when you think of all of Bach's BWVs, Mozart's Ks, Haydn's Hobs, and all the other composer's opuses, including Beethoven's WOOs.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Coach G said:


> If that's all there is and Mussorgsky composed only 12, then his hit-to-miss ratio is outstanding when you think of all of Bach's BWVs, Mozart's Ks, Haydn's Hobs, and all the other composer's opuses, including Beethoven's WOOs.


I'm trying to think of a Bach miss, but I'm coming up empty.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> I'm trying to think of a Bach miss, but I'm coming up empty.


OK. So maybe all of Bach's 1,000+ BWVs are worth hearing. Far be it for me put Mussorgsky up against Bach. On the other hand, if Mussorgsky only has 16 opuses, then how would those 16 Ops compete with the first 16 BWVs of Bach, or the first 16 of Mozart's Ks, or the first 16 Hobs of Haydn, or first 16 Ops of Beethoven, etc.?

I mean, if both Ravel _and_ Stokowski are going to go through all the trouble of orchestrating "Pictures at an Exhibition"...then?


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> I'm trying to think of a Bach miss, but I'm coming up empty.


Yeah, not something that I'd have thought up on my own, but now that you've mentioned it, someone is bound to start a *Worst of Bach* thread: *Bach Flops*.

A lot of people would put *Air on the G String* as a 'miss', I think. Not me, but others.

But there are some duds (when compared to his other works) you _could_ make a case for:

*Chromatic Fantasy* BWV 903
*Italian Concerto* BWV 971
*Sinfonia for violin and orchestra* BWV 1045
and maybe the *Duet "Mein Freund ist mein" *from the *"Sleepers Wake" Cantata* BWV 140


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Bulldog said:


> I'm trying to think of a Bach miss, but I'm coming up empty.


But how would Bach fare had he been hitting the bottle as much as Mussorgsky?


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Coach G said:


> OK. So maybe all of Bach's 1,000+ BWVs are worth hearing. Far be it for me put Mussorgsky up against Bach. On the other hand, if Mussorgsky only has 16 opuses, then how would those 16 Ops compete with the first 16 BWVs of Bach, or the first 16 of Mozart's Ks, or the first 16 Hobs of Haydn, or first 16 Ops of Beethoven, etc.?
> 
> I mean, if both Ravel _and_ Stokowski are going to go through all the trouble of orchestrating "Pictures at an Exhibition"...then?





Coach G said:


> OK. So maybe all of Bach's 1,000+ BWVs are worth hearing. Far be it for me put Mussorgsky up against Bach. On the other hand, if Mussorgsky only has 16 opuses, then how would those 16 Ops compete with the first 16 BWVs of Bach, or the first 16 of Mozart's Ks, or the first 16 Hobs of Haydn, or first 16 Ops of Beethoven, etc.?
> 
> I mean, if both Ravel _and_ Stokowski are going to go through all the trouble of orchestrating "Pictures at an Exhibition"...then?


An unfair comparison to simply compare Opuses 1-12 of each composer. With Mussorgsky, you have to also consider the time frame. It took *Mussorgsky* 15 years to get to his Op. 12, even then his Op. 6 (The Nursery) was unfinished, a couple of songs short.

*Mozart* had gotten to K12 by 1764 - WHEN HE WAS 8 YEARS OLD. By the time he was 18 he was up to K200 or so.

*Beethoven* took 5 years to get to Op. 12, but that included 4 piano trios, 8 piano sonatas, 5 string trios, a string quintet, 2 cello sonatas, and 3 violin sonatas.

Well, given that it's one or two operas, Pictures, Bald Mtn., and several collections of songs, and even given the reworkings and orchestrations by others, you could probably knock off Mussorgsky's entire catalog in a day. If you included the operas he didn't finish, but have been 'finished' by others you could add another hour or two I guess.

The complete works of Mozart would take 200 hours - if you listened 8 hours every day, including weekends, you'd be listening for a month.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

pianozach said:


> Yeah, not something that I'd have thought up on my own, but now that you've mentioned it, someone is bound to start a *Worst of Bach* thread: *Bach Flops*.
> 
> A lot of people would put *Air on the G String* as a 'miss', I think. Not me, but others.
> 
> ...


Bach had this one neat trick where all the bad pieces are disputed as being "spurious". If it sucks, it can't be an authentic Bach, according to musicologists.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Mussorgsky has an oeuvre approximately equal to that of Wagner, if you get rid of all 10 mature operas, or Mahler, if you exclude the Symphonies. The guy spent too much time at the pub.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

pianozach said:


> Yeah, not something that I'd have thought up on my own, but now that you've mentioned it, someone is bound to start a *Worst of Bach* thread: *Bach Flops*.
> 
> A lot of people would put *Air on the G String* as a 'miss', I think. Not me, but others.
> 
> ...


The fugue in Bach's Toccata in D minor for clavichord BWV 913 is really bad, but then, it's supposed to be an early work.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Couchie said:


> Mussorgsky has an oeuvre approximately equal to that of Wagner, if you get rid of all 10 mature operas, or Mahler, if you exclude the Symphonies. The guy spent too much time at the pub.


And Borodin spent too much time in the lab.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I gather Mussorgsky was also stuck in a civil service drudge job which he hated. He probably needed the money as the family fortunes had dwindled after the Emancipation of the Serfs reforms but if anything it probably made him drink even harder.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

CnC Bartok said:


> And Borodin spent too much time in the lab.


Borodin is another interesting case, not even a professional musician (Tchaikovsky wrote that Borodin couldn't compose a single line of music without outside help), with a slim number of Ops and another high hit-to-miss ratio. The Mighty Five was an unusual group of musicians, who worked collaboratively and were largely self-taught, not always such a bad way to learn in the arts.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

pianozach said:


> But there are some duds (when compared to his other works) you _could_ make a case for:
> 
> *Chromatic Fantasy* BWV 903
> *Italian Concerto* BWV 971


I'm stunned that anyone would give consideration to these two works being duds.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

pianozach said:


> Yeah, not something that I'd have thought up on my own, but now that you've mentioned it, someone is bound to start a *Worst of Bach* thread: *Bach Flops*.
> 
> A lot of people would put *Air on the G String* as a 'miss', I think. Not me, but others.
> 
> ...


No, none of those!!! The flute sonatas and the partita for solo flute _clearly_ ('cause I say it's true) show him at his most uninspired


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> No, none of those!!! The flute sonatas and the partita for solo flute _clearly_ ('cause I say it's true) show him at his most uninspired


The flute partita, maybe...but mainly because it's hard for a single-line melody instrument to maintain interest for 15 minutes. But I'd hardly call this "uninspired":




Now to the topic of the thread: I think Mussorgsky's music is very interesting and even brilliant at times. Unfortunately he didn't live very long or produce very much.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> I'm stunned that anyone would give consideration to these two works being duds.


*Glenn Gould*, a bona fide Bach expert, had some choice words to say about the *Chromatic Fantasy* and the *Italian Concerto*.

He called them *"Bach for people who don't like Bach"*. I THINK it's because Bach was, in a way, dumbing down in an attempt to write in the up-and-coming "Gallant" style. Additionally, both works are born from non-linear ideas and developed with counterpoint only serving as an ornament.

Then again, when you *LISTEN* to Gould playing these you'd never think THAT at all . . . in his hands these pieces become rather profound and even emotional.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

trazom said:


> The fugue in Bach's Toccata in D minor for clavichord BWV 913 is really bad, but then, it's supposed to be an early work.


It's "bad" compared to the rest of Bach. If it had Handel's name on it it might be called a masterpiece. I do think though that the keyboard toccatas might be Bach's weakest works. I never could get into them much, either playing or listening.
PS- I'm not a big fan of the Italian Concerto or the French Overture either (Clavier-Übung II). As for the Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue, the Fugue is great, the Fantasy not quite as great. Bach was the greatest composer ever imo, but he wasn't infallible.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

pianozach said:


> *Glenn Gould*, a bona fide Bach expert, had some choice words to say about the *Chromatic Fantasy* and the *Italian Concerto*.
> 
> He called them *"Bach for people who don't like Bach"*. I THINK it's because Bach was, in a way, dumbing down in an attempt to write in the up-and-coming "Gallant" style. Additionally, both works are born from non-linear ideas and developed with counterpoint only serving as an ornament.
> 
> Then again, when you *LISTEN* to Gould playing these you'd never think THAT at all . . . in his hands these pieces become rather profound and even emotional.


Gould's expertise was playing Bach, not verbalizing about Bach's music. Besides, I love Bach and both referenced works.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

consuono said:


> It's "bad" compared to the rest of Bach. If it had Handel's name on it it might be called a masterpiece.


I doubt it, I don't even think it's as good as the earlier toccatas it's normally published with. I like the G minor and E minor clavichord fugues fine, but this one's just bad. Attaching another composer's name to the piece wouldn't make all the literal repetition of the subject and extended sequencing like this passage sound any better, at least to me: 



.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

pianozach said:


> *Glenn Gould*, a bona fide Bach expert, had some choice words to say about the *Chromatic Fantasy* and the *Italian Concerto*.
> He called them *"Bach for people who don't like Bach"*. I THINK it's because Bach was, in a way, dumbing down in an attempt to write in the up-and-coming "Gallant" style. Additionally, both works are born from non-linear ideas and developed with counterpoint only serving as an ornament.







Well, Gould was a conceited eccentric. He made lots of wrong assumptions from his lack of proper knowledge. A lot of things he says in this video also shows Gould's ignorance of classical music history:





"Until the nineteenth century, music education began with what is called species counterpoint. In this exercise the student is given a simple phrase of long, even notes like part of a Gregorian chant, called a cantus firmus, and is asked to write another phrase of long, even notes that could be played or sung with it. The first species is one note of the countermelody for one note of the cantus firmus; the different species then advance in rhythmic complexity, the last being a free rhythm against the original cantus firmus. The student advances from two voices to three-, four-, and five-part counterpoint." (The Romantic Generation, By Charles Rosen, Page 553)

"He [Chopin] said the problem with the way they teach nowadays is that they teach the chords before they teach the movement of voices that creates the chords. That's the problem, he said, with Berlioz. He applies the chords as a kind of veneer and fills in the gaps the best way he can. Chopin then said that you can get a sense of pure logic in music with fugue and he cited not Bach-though we know that he worshiped Bach-but Mozart. He said, in every one of Mozart's pieces, you feel the counterpoint." (The Art of Tonal Analysis: Twelve Lessons in Schenkerian Theory, By Carl Schachter, Page 57)



hammeredklavier said:


> ^I agree about Wim Winters. Glenn Gould was another performer who should have done more proper historical research. It's funny they both share the similarities of disrespecting the composers' original intentions and having alliterative names.
> Gould: _"With Bach's death, the tradition of fugue went underground for a time it was ignored by the younger generation of his day..."_
> What Gould failed to realize was that church composers across Germany kept doing their fugal writing regardless of Bach's death. There's even a letter to Mozart from his father (1777) that discusses the importance of fugal writing.
> Leopold Mozart's Litaniae in C: Pignus Futurae Gloriae  (c. 1768)
> Mozart specifically described in a letter to his sister (1782) that K394 must be played at 'andante maestoso'. Gould obviously didn't know this fact. Or even if he knew it, he might still have ignored it and mindlessly butchered the piece like he did other pieces of the repertoire.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

trazom said:


> I doubt it, I don't even think it's as good as the earlier toccatas it's normally published with. I like the G minor and E minor clavichord fugues fine, but this one's just bad. Attaching another composer's name to the piece wouldn't make all the literal repetition of the subject and extended sequencing like this passage sound any better, at least to me:
> 
> 
> 
> .


I don't doubt it. Now I have a lot of respect and admiration for Handel, but if the following were attributed to Bach it would be considered "bad", I'm sure. This fugue really doesn't seem to go anywhere:




And imagine if this were in Bach's catalogue of works and not Handel's:


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

consuono said:


> I don't doubt it. Now I have a lot of respect and admiration for Handel, but if the following were attributed to Bach it would be considered "bad", I'm sure. This fugue really doesn't seem to go anywhere:


I think the fugue is excellent! - purposeful with a finely drawn dramatic arc. I like the Neapolitan inflections especially.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

EdwardBast said:


> I think the fugue is excellent! - purposeful with a finely drawn dramatic arc. I like the Neapolitan inflections especially.


quod erat demonstrandum


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

_Boris Godunov_ IS would the greatest classical music works ever written. For a part-time composer that is remarkable. It's too bad Mussorgsky didn't/couldn't devote himself completely to composing.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

SixFootScowl said:


> Agree except I would say that RImsky *thought* he had to touch up Boris. As it is, Boris was revised by Mussorgsky, but it seems with a lot of pressure from his "friends." I prefer the original boris, though the Polish scene of the revision is great too. I'll keep the St. Basil Holy Fool scene over the Kromy Forest Holy Fool scene.


I believe Rimsky said something to the effect (loosing quoted here), "I had to revise this opera so it could be heard. My work will have to do until the world realizes his original is far better." That leads me to believe Rimsky valued Mussorgsky's work highly and wanted to keep in alive and did what he had to do to keep it alive.


----------



## gellio (Nov 7, 2013)

SixFootScowl said:


> Yeah, took him about 10 years to finish one opera, and if he had been hitting the bottle like Mussorgsky, he might not have even finished that.


I think that was due to the circumstances of the premiere of Leonore. The Viennese fled Vienna, leaving Beethoven with an inadequate orchestra and singers, who couldn't handle the piece at the tempos written - so it dragged. It was mostly an audience of French soldiers. I believe had this not be the case, Leonore, in it's 1805 form, would have been a success and Beethoven would have written more opera.


----------



## Rach Man (Aug 2, 2016)

SixFootScowl said:


> My introduction to Mussorgsky's music was via *Emerson, Lake and Palmer's rendition of Pictures at an Exhibition*. Awesome work either way.


I had some introduction to classical music in my elementary school. But I know that the ELP version of Pictures at an Exhibition was the gateway to my adult classical music education.

I absolutely loved it. But when I heard a full orchestra play it, I was amazed and realized that I had to listen to more classical music.


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

Cmon couch...His ''pictures on exhibition'' are nothing short of Masterpiece...Aactually the 1st classical work I ever heard and thought of terms like PERFECTION, HARMONY, MELODY, MESSAGE, CONSTRUCTION, SOUL...:tiphat:


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Couchie said:


> Bach had this one neat trick where all the bad pieces are disputed as being "spurious". If it sucks, it can't be an authentic Bach, according to musicologists.


Yeah, they're kinda like certain Beethovenians who would often say: "Mozart's "better" stuff sounds "Beethovenian" (ie. Mozart 24th piano concerto), whereas Beethoven's "weaker" stuff sounds "Mozartian" (ie. Beethoven 25th piano sonata)"
Hahahahahahahahahaha
just kidding


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gellio said:


> I believe Rimsky said something to the effect (loosing quoted here), "I had to revise this opera so it could be heard. My work will have to do until the world realizes his original is far better." That leads me to believe Rimsky valued Mussorgsky's work highly and wanted to keep in alive and did what he had to do to keep it alive.


Thanks for posting that. It is a revelation and a good one. The world, perhaps, wasn't ready for raw Mussorgsky.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

gellio said:


> I think that was due to the circumstances of the premiere of Leonore. The Viennese fled Vienna, leaving Beethoven with an inadequate orchestra and singers, who couldn't handle the piece at the tempos written - so it dragged. It was mostly an audience of French soldiers. I believe had this not be the case, Leonore, in it's 1805 form, would have been a success and Beethoven would have written more opera.


Exactly. And when I get my Jacobs' Leonore I will know for sure!

Oh, and my post about Beethoven was tongue-in-cheek.


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

I found out an almost ritualistic chill-pill in that piece...Whenever I was sad or angry or both it quickly put me ''in the zone'', in a place of total peace where there was no confusion or loss of anything, just a ''dusty old museum'', in my mind. where everything is magickal and lasts 4ever, obliterating my greatest fear of losing ppl and things...I dont remember I had such pictoresque, imaginative x-perience with any other classical work, some came close but no cigar...


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

I would rank Mussorgsky above Cesar Cui, Jules Massanet, and several others.

Certainly the worst famous "composer" is Ludovico Einaudi.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

The best non-famous composer is Franklin Flabbergasted Fart (1900-2012)


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Ethereality said:


> The best non-famous composer is Franklin Flabbergasted Fart (1900-2012)


Ever heard of PDQ Bach? Or Beethovorgsky?


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Looks like he has a good ear.


----------



## Fredrikalansson (Jan 29, 2019)

SixFootScowl said:


> Agree except I would say that RImsky *thought* he had to touch up Boris. As it is, Boris was revised by Mussorgsky, but it seems with a lot of pressure from his "friends." I prefer the original boris, though the Polish scene of the revision is great too. I'll keep the St. Basil Holy Fool scene over the Kromy Forest Holy Fool scene.


I once saw a performance with both Holy Fool scenes, St. Basil _and_ Kromy Forest. The impact was heart-breaking. The fool was tricked a second time by the children. He can never learn. The opera opens with the Russian people begging Boris to be their Tsar, and the opera ends with the Russian people acclaiming the Pretender as their new saviour. The people have been tricked a second time. They can never learn. The fate of the Fool is the fate of the People. It never ends. Heart-breaking.

I don't know if it would work on a recording though.


----------



## Superflumina (Jun 19, 2020)

Boris Godunov (the 1872 Mussorgsky version) is one of the greatest operas ever, plus his Songs and Dances of Death, unfinished operas, songs and piano works make him one of the truly great composers. His output might be small when compared to other greats, but almost everything is really high quality.


----------



## mark6144 (Apr 6, 2019)

I've just been exploring Mussorgsky's solo piano music, other than Pictures at an Exhibition. Must say, I'm surprised; much of it sounds very familiar, as if I've heard it before on an advert or a musical box or something. I'm not sure how much depth is there or how many listens it'll stand up to, but he certainly had a knack for writing beautiful and catchy melodies.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Mussorgsky was an erratic genius whose life was upended by his tragic alcoholism . His music was truly original and his well meaning friend Rimsky-Korakov felt the need to edit and "improve" his music because of its "faulty " harmonies and lack of conventional good craftsmanship . 
But his quirky harmonies and odd asymmetric rhythms are what make it so fascinating . 
Rimsky turned Boris Godunov, Mussorgsky's only completed opera , into a sumptuous sounding opera, nowhere near as raw and powerful as the original . He bowdlerized his friend's "crude " harmonies and made the orchestration too slick and opulent , even though is revision is still quite effective on its own terms . 
And he managed to complete "Khovanshchina" and make it performable . Khovanshchina is not as well known or as frequently performed as "Boris", but it is a genuine masterpiece nevertheless . 
Mussorgsky is a truly great composer despite his lack of conventional good craftsmanship . Who knows what he might have achieved had he lived longer ?


----------

