# Bartok vs stravinsky



## deprofundis (Apr 25, 2014)

Seem there sonic universe are similar in term of power and atmosphere correct me if i am wrong 
Bartók had the miraculeous mandarin suite and Stravinsky had spring rites, meaning there ballet 
Kick *** .Than the music is different but the ambience is similar whit other work if you compared
em, well maybe...

But i preffer Bartók over Stravinsky, maybe i did heard enought Stravinsky to says this but for me Bartók has more to offer for my lisening pleasure.

Stravinsky kinda annoy me sometime for a reason , that i can't point out.. 
Who whit me on this or understand what i am saying, about this observation.

Have a nice day folks :tiphat:

p.s Than i bet a pizza someone will says the opposite that im wrong and that Stravinsky is way better than Bartók ockay sir maybe for you sir or madam we live in a democracy.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Not from me! I completely agree with you. I prefer Bartók over Stravinsky too.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

I'm offended that you didn't make this a poll, but I suppose I'll participate. 

Bartok, by a hair. Or two.

Edit: I'm referring to who is my favorite of the two. Not who's the better composer, in which case, I'd give it to Stravinsky. Also, my favorite single composition from either of them is far and away the _Rite_.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Stravinsky by a mile, not because Bartok is not a great composer, but because Stravinsky is far and away one of the best composers of all time. That's hard to compete with.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

I am big fans of both, but prefer Igor. More variety over the course of his career. 

However, Bartok wrote simple piano pieces that I can play. So that's in his favor.


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

Bartok, by many curls of hair. I don't think Stravinsky wrote anything to match the philosophical insight of Bartok's 'Bluebeard's Castle' into the human subconscious. Also, I find his various changes of style throughout his career lessen the overall achievement of his music-he is a bit of a chameleon. 

The 'Rite of Spring' set a standard for the 'primitive ' in music , but I find Prokofiev's Scythian Suite more 'barbaric' and better orchestrated as well.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

What does this local popularity of the 'versus' format indicate? Shouldn't there be evidence of conflict somewhere - besides in someone's head?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

manyene said:


> Bartok, by many curls of hair. I don't think Stravinsky wrote anything to match the philosophical insight of Bartok's 'Bluebeard's Castle' into the human subconscious. Also, I find his various changes of style throughout his career lessen the overall achievement of his music-*he is a bit of a chameleon.*


But it all still sounds like Stravinsky.

The composer of Petrushka, The Rite of Spring, Les Noces, The Soldier's Tale, the Octet, Oedipus Rex, Apollo, the Violin Concerto, Duo Concertant, the Symphony in C, the Concerto for Two Pianos, the Mass, Orpheus, The Rake's Progress, Threni, Movements for Piano and Orchestra, The Dove Descending, and Requiem Canticles clearly has a distinct personality that refuses to be subsumed no matter how many influences it takes in.

Even his arrangements end up sounding like Stravinsky.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Ukko said:


> What does this local popularity of the 'versus' format indicate? Shouldn't there be evidence of conflict somewhere - besides in someone's head?


Maybe we need less "versus" and more verses?

*ahem*

Roses are red, 
violets are blue--
_You_ may like Bartok, 
But Stravinsky's good too!


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

manyene said:


> The 'Rite of Spring' set a standard for the 'primitive ' in music , but I find Prokofiev's Scythian Suite more 'barbaric' and better orchestrated as well.


I love Scythian suite.....it's as picturesque and imaginative as the rite, I would say...definitely my favorite Prokofiev.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bartók moves me. Slow movements of Piano Concertos 2 and 3. The complete Violin Concerto No. 2, etc.

Stravinsky leave me cold. Le Sacre is a great work, but moving? No.


----------



## Piwikiwi (Apr 1, 2011)

Blancrocher said:


> Maybe we need less "versus" and more verses?
> 
> *ahem*
> 
> ...


Fox gloves are pink
daffodils are white--
I don't care what you think
and I'm always right

(This took me way too long)


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

Up until the last year or so, I would have answered Stravinsky without hesitation.

Now, I am not so sure. Bartok has moved up quite a bit in my esteem.

I think I still give the edge to Stravinsky, but it's not as clear cut as it once was.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

It really depends on my mood. I love both. And heaven knows I've tried to dismiss Stravinsky, but it cannot be done. Objectively speaking, he ranks above Bartók in terms of greatness.

On a side note, I could be wrong, but I don't think Russia has had any notable composers after Stravinsky.


----------



## MoonlightSonata (Mar 29, 2014)

Stravinsky is probably the better composer, but I prefer Bartok.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bartók was the more "human" composer.

Bartok:Stravinsky= Haydn:Mozart.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

hpowders said:


> Bartók was the more "human" composer.
> 
> Bartok:Stravinsky= Haydn:Mozart.




Thanks, hp. That summarizes the thread.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Ukko said:


> Thanks, hp. That summarizes the thread.


I'm always available to help. All I ask is a six millisecond notice in advance to prepare my argument. :tiphat:


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

hpowders said:


> Bartók moves me. Slow movements of Piano Concertos 2 and 3. The complete Violin Concerto No. 2, etc.
> 
> Stravinsky leave me cold. Le Sacre is a great work, but moving? No.


That's just it. I remember reading somewhere that Stravinsky used different coloured inks when he composed the various 'lines' in his music, suggesting a rather cerebral and 'cold' approach to composition which I find reflected in his later music, apart from the final part of the _Symphony of Psalms_, and _Perséphone_.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

manyene said:


> That's just it. I remember reading somewhere that Stravinsky used different coloured inks when he composed the various 'lines' in his music, suggesting a rather cerebral and 'cold' approach to composition which I find reflected in his later music, apart from the final part of the _Symphony of Psalms_, and _Perséphone_.


In what way does that indicate coldness or cerebrality?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Piwikiwi said:


> Fox gloves are pink
> daffodils are white--
> I don't care what you think
> and I'm always right
> ...


it's OK. Being right is hard work.

By the way, daffodils may also be yellow. This makes you right only part of the time. You must work harder.


----------



## LancsMan (Oct 28, 2013)

Tough one this, as I rate both highly. I suspect that Stravinsky was the 'greater' of the two composers, but I find more human warmth in Bartok. Wouldn't be without either.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Stravinsky may be the more prolific and versatile composer, but Bartok hits me in a deeper place. I say this even though I find him more challenging to listen to, both intellectually and emotionally, and don't always like him. I keep telling myself that I need to come to terms with those quartets, and somehow I keep putting it off. But I would rather hear his Violin Concerto, his Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta, his Third Piano Concerto, and especially Bluebeard's Castle, than anything by Stravinsky. That music touches me and haunts me as Stravinsky's seldom does.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

My favorite Stravinsky transmutes exterior information into interior sensations. Bartók is often inside from the beginning. Until one gains familiarity with one's inside, there may be some disorientation due to lack of references.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> it's OK. Being right is hard work.
> 
> By the way, daffodils may also be yellow. This makes you right only part of the time. You must work harder.


...and foxgloves can be white or yellow too.


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2015)

Bartok wrote a lot of music that I listen to often and love. However...

Stravinsky wrote the The Rite of Spring and if that was ALL he wrote I would give up everything of Bartok's to keep it.

Thankfully I can have Bartok _and_ the Rite _and_ all the other great things that Stravinsky wrote too. It's a wonderful world!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> ...and foxgloves can be white or yellow too.


Uh oh! Don't tell Piwikiwi!


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

@woodduck: Stravinsky was hardly prolific. Bartók's output is larger.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Morimur said:


> @woodduck: Stravinsky was hardly prolific. Bartók's output is larger.


What? I was always under the impression that Stravinsky was more prolific...In fact, I'm pretty sure.


----------



## TradeMark (Mar 12, 2015)

I like Bartok but I find his orchestration a bit dull in comparison to Stravinsky's. Stravinsky's music just has so much color. Stravinsky's music also has more humor.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

violadude said:


> What? I was always under the impression that Stravinsky was more prolific...In fact, I'm pretty sure.


Judging by the breakdown of the Bartok complete edition here:
http://www.classical.net/~music/recs/reviews/h/hgr41002a.php

It makes for 29 discs worth. There are some alternate versions and pieces missing from the 23-disc Stravinsky set (the longest of which is probably the boring juvenilia of the Sonata in F# minor), but not enough to fill that much extra time.

Still, it's not so much of a difference that I would call one composer prolific and the other not (although Stravinsky was certainly not prolific in his late period).


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> Judging by the breakdown of the Bartok complete edition here:
> http://www.classical.net/~music/recs/reviews/h/hgr41002a.php
> 
> It makes for 29 discs worth. There are some alternate versions and pieces missing from the 23-disc Stravinsky set (the longest of which is probably the boring juvenilia of the Sonata in F# minor), but not enough to fill that much extra time.
> ...


Interesting. I always thought Bartok was a little less prolific. I'm wondering if Bartok wrote more pieces than Stravinsky or more longer pieces.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I wonder if the Stravinsky box includes both versions of the early works that he re-wrote to get copyrighted versions back on the books. If so, that would close the gap somewhat.

Still, Bartok's composing career lasted about 42 years and Stravinsky's 59, so Bartok may win in the music-per-year category.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

KenOC said:


> I wonder if the Stravinsky box includes both versions of the early works that he re-wrote to get copyrighted versions back on the books. If so, that would close the gap somewhat.


It does not.

It also lacks the piano or string quartet versions of works he later orchestrated, and some of the arrangements for violin and piano he made for himself and Samuel Dushkin to play.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> It does not.
> 
> It also lacks the piano or string quartet versions of works he later orchestrated, and some of the arrangements for violin and piano he made for himself and Samuel Dushkin to play.


And it doesn't have the Elegy for solo viola.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> That music touches me and haunts me as Stravinsky's seldom does.


We can arrange to have Prokofiev's Inquisitor do an exorcism :angel:


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

violadude said:


> And it doesn't have the Elegy for solo viola.


Or the Fanfare for a New Theater, For Pablo Picasso, or Three Pieces for Clarinet Solo. There might be something else I'm missing...

Ah, the arrangement of Star-Spangled Banner.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Ukko said:


> My favorite Stravinsky transmutes exterior information into interior sensations. Bartók is often inside from the beginning. Until one gains familiarity with one's inside, there may be some disorientation due to lack of references.


My sense is that Bartok's "inside" is deep and quite mysterious, and that his music expresses that. Bluebeard in the opera feels like the composer's self-portrait; Judith comes too close too seeing into his deeply submerged secret self, and so must be consigned to the darkness of memory. I can't penetrate that secret self which I feel in his music, and I find it, alternately or together, fascinating and beautiful and/or horrifying and repellent. In any case I find it pretty potent.

I do not hear much of the "inside" of Stravinsky. To the extent that I enjoy him it is mainly a pleasure of the mind, with a few exceptions naturally including the Russian-Romantic _Firebird_, which is fairy-tale enchantment, and the physically exhilarating _Sacre._


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Stravinsky expresses his personality through his music, and is "naturally talented" as an artist. 

Bartok is more of a thinker, and his ideas about music are more fully-realised expressions of thought. He has "overall underlying principles" which help create his music.

Stravinsky's "underlying principles" are not as far-reaching, but this lack of large, abstract thought-processes is offset by a natural "being-ness" which asserts itself more as a presence, than a process.

In this sense, Stravinsky is more human than Bartok. This cannot be learned, it simply has to develop and manifest itself as the "soul" of the artist.

Bartok has this also, but he tempers it with thought procersses. Is one better than the other? Just different.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

violadude said:


> Interesting. I always thought Bartok was a little less prolific. I'm wondering if Bartok wrote more pieces than Stravinsky or more longer pieces.


On average, I think Bartok wrote longer pieces.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

At least when Bartok used folk melodies, he gave them credit........Stravinsky used a plethora and 'admitted' to stealing one (the bassoon opening) so he could pacify would-be investigators (quite successfully). Nothing new here though, Beethoven, chopin and most composers of high quality did a fair amount of what would today be thought of as appropriating, quotational, or plagiarism.

I like them both when they're being dramatic and beautiful.....and in those pieces/ moments they speak to me more than most music could....I just don't have the musical endurance for their dry (Stravinsky) or arcane (Bartok) pieces.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

What appeals to me about Bartok is the almost perpetual darkness and grotesqueness present in most of his music. Depending on one's life experiences, one either gravitates to morbidity or loathes it. Stravinsky's music is a like sharp, bright ray of light which I can appreciate from time to time, but don't naturally gravitate to.

I've come to the conclusion that Bartok isn't considered as 'great' as Stravinsky because his work isn't conventionally beautiful—naturally, that limits his appeal.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Morimur said:


> What appeals to me about Bartok is the almost perpetual darkness and grotesqueness present in most of his music. Depending on one's life experiences, one either gravitates to morbidity or loathes it. Stravinsky's music is a like sharp, bright ray of light which I can appreciate from time to time, but don't naturally gravitate to.
> 
> *I've come to the conclusion that Bartok isn't considered as 'great' as Stravinsky because his work isn't conventionally beautiful-naturally, that limits his appeal.*


I think it may also have to do with the fact that he's harder to "place" culturally. Stravinsky was a conspicuous and fashionable figure in the modern art scene throughout his lifetime; he has always been a personage and a "name," like Picasso or Stein or Auden. Bartok went his private way and was not given to hanging out at French salons and tossing off pseudo-profundities such as "music expresses nothing." He was also from a country that most people know nothing about and couldn't place on a map. His music, I agree, has less surface charm than Stravinsky's, and many people find him difficult. Some feel he's the greatest composer of his time; Sibelius, apparently, was of that opinion. I don't have an opinion about that myself. But he does affect me more deeply.


----------



## Cheyenne (Aug 6, 2012)

I would give Stravinsky the credit he deserves as the great artist he is, but Bartók's string quartets never tire me so I will have to give victory to him.. by a slight margin.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Cheyenne said:


> I would give Stravinsky the credit he deserves as the great artist he is, but Bartók's string quartets never tire me so I will have to give victory to him.. by a slight margin.


I've had _The Miraculous Mandarin, Music for Strings, Percussion, and Celesta (Boulez)_ on repeat since 2:00pm. It is now 5:39pm.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Bartok's orchestral music still leaves me cold. On the other hand I've never really understood why the SQ's are supposed to be "difficult" music.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Morimur said:


> What appeals to me about Bartok is the almost perpetual darkness and grotesqueness present in most of his music. Depending on one's life experiences, one either gravitates to morbidity or loathes it. Stravinsky's music is a like sharp, bright ray of light which I can appreciate from time to time, but don't naturally gravitate to.
> 
> I've come to the conclusion that Bartok isn't considered as 'great' as Stravinsky because his work isn't conventionally beautiful-naturally, that limits his appeal.


It is odd, but I find my reaction to the music of Stravinsky and Bartok almost completely the opposite of this. I think it has to do with the observation above that Bartok is the more 'human' composer - I agree and this is how his music comes across to me.

Another analogy is on the surface some things appear to be what they are not. (ie - Corporate criminals) Or from the Bible - (paraphrase) _the Devil can appear as an angel of light_.

Stravinsky's music to me has this almost sociopathic and very detached feel to it. I fully admit these things could be completely untrue about the essence of Stravinsky's music and mere personal projections. But Stravinsky's music strikes me like that corporate criminal - a shiny, beautiful upstanding member of society on the surface, and sheer darkness underneath.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

I find both Bartok's and Stravinsky's music rather unemotional but not in the sense of dry or non-expressive.


----------



## GhenghisKhan (Dec 25, 2014)

I am curious: how do you guys determine that or that is sociopathic, expressive, humane, etc or not?


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Stravinsky was deeply committed to his Christianity, and wrote religious works. I'm not sure Bartok has written
any or not. This often, but not always, draws me to one composer over another. 
Stravinsky seems to stir my intellect more. I also find some of his works to be very beautiful. He also seems
more innovative, but that's not to say Bartok is never innovative. I'll take Stravinsky.


----------



## GhenghisKhan (Dec 25, 2014)

For me its the contrary. Stravinsky strikes me as being far more accessible.

Not that it's nescessarily a bad thing.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

GhenghisKhan said:


> I am curious: how do you guys determine that or that is sociopathic, expressive, humane, etc or not?


Nothing scientific. In my case I was simply discussing subjective perceptions of the music.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

regenmusic said:


> Stravinsky was deeply committed to his Christianity, and wrote religious works. I'm not sure Bartok has written
> any or not.


I don't actually know that much about Stravinsky or Bartok in their personal lives. However, when someone states they are a "deeply committed Christian", personally I feel this tells me exactly nothing about an individual in terms of their character and morality.


----------



## Piwikiwi (Apr 1, 2011)

> Another analogy is on the surface some things appear to be what they are not. (ie - Corporate criminals) Or from the Bible - (paraphrase) _the Devil can appear as an angel of light_.


Like Miles Davis, Stan Getz, Benny Goodman, Art Pepper and Chet Baker. Their music sounds very sweet but they were quite terrible people. 


> Stravinsky's music to me has this almost sociopathic and very detached feel to it. I fully admit these things could be completely untrue about the essence of Stravinsky's music and mere personal projections. But Stravinsky's music strikes me like that corporate criminal - a shiny, beautiful upstanding member of society on the surface, and sheer darkness underneath.


The sort of "cold" detachment is actually what I like about his music. He presents it as a work of craftsmanship, and the pieces are not forcing an emotion on me.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Piwikiwi said:


> The sort of "cold" detachment is actually what I like about his music. He presents it as a work of craftsmanship, and the pieces are not forcing an emotion on me.


Yes, sometimes I like that too and he does have a lot of pieces I like a lot. Certainly a ridiculously talented composer and one of the greats.

I consider both Bartok and Stravinsky great composers. I don't think one was clearly much better than the other, though I prefer Bartok.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

tdc said:


> I don't actually know that much about Stravinsky or Bartok in their personal lives. However, when someone states they are a "deeply committed Christian", personally I feel this tells me exactly nothing about an individual in terms of their character and morality.


As a person, Stravinsky was an elitist, a jerk, and had just about every unpleasant quality one could imagine.

As a composer, while I think I understand what you perceive as being the "coldness" of his music, I think that it's quite the opposite in that underneath the surface is something very personal and emotional, just expressed in a way that makes it appear impersonal at first glance.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> As a person, Stravinsky was an elitist, a jerk, and had just about every unpleasant quality one could imagine.


Can you quote some sources for this comment?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

regenmusic said:


> Can you quote some sources for this comment?


In 1930, he (Stravinsky) remarked, "I don't believe that anyone venerates Mussolini more than I ... I know many exalted personages, and my artist's mind does not shrink from political and social issues. Well, after having seen so many events and so many more or less representative men, I have an overpowering urge to render homage to your Duce. He is the saviour of Italy and - let us hope - Europe"

That should be enough to give you an idea.


----------

