# the lowest tier, part 4 - to Dec 7



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

We're picking some works to promote from the 123rd and lowest tier of the Talk Classical community's favorite and most highly recommended works. We'll do this tier here in the main board, but the subsequent tiers will be in the polls subforum.

It currently has 757 works, so I've divided it into 9 parts of 84 works each (and the 9th part has an 85th work). From each part, we're going to move the works that get the absolute most votes up four tiers to the 119th tier, the next 14 works up three tiers to the 120th tier, the next 14 works up two tiers to the 121st tier, and the next 28 works up one tier to the 122nd tier. The works that get the fewest votes will remain on the lowest tier.

Each voter will get *up to FIVE +7 votes*, up to SIX +6 votes, SEVEN +5 votes, up to EIGHT +4 votes, up to NINE +3 votes, up to TEN +2 votes, and as many +1 votes as you want. *You don't have to use all of them, but you must have fewer +7 votes than +6 votes, fewer +6 than +5 votes, fewer +5 votes than +4 votes, and so on.*

If you have any questions, just ask!

Probably none of us knows all of the works listed below. Feel free to vote for the works that are already familiar to you, but voting on this thread will be open *12 days* -- closing Dec 7, Korea time, so you have plenty of time to explore a few that are new to you, and I sincerely hope that many of you will do so. That's the entire point of this project! In fact, I really hope you'll try a few things that you normally wouldn't....

When the time's up, I will tally the votes on a Google sheet, post the results in the main thread of this protect, and move the works to their new tiers.

Have fun! Also, please remember that we hope our selections will influence people's exploration of classical music.

Incidentally, if you spot a work that we're missing, check the alphabetical list to be sure, and if we really are missing it, then go to the main thread to add it. You can add one new work every day, but you can add several days' worth of works at once if you want.

Here is a template you use for your vote:



> +7 (up to 5 works)
> 
> +6 (up to 6 works)
> 
> ...


Within those levels, I'd appreciate it if you put the works in alphabetical order for me. Makes it much easier for me!

Here are the eligible works for this thread (please let me know if you spot any errors):

Freitas Branco: Symphony #4 in D major [1952]
Froberger: Suite #18 (Partita) in G minor, FbWV 618 [mid-17th century]
Frumerie: Symphonic Variations on Vårvindar friska, op. 25 [1940-41]
Fry: Christmas Symphony "Santa Claus" [1853]
Gaito: Piano Quintet, op. 24 [1917]
Galilei, V: Libro d'intavolature di liuto [1584]
Gaos: Symphony #2 "En las montañas de Galicia" [1917-9]
Gernsheim: Piano Trio #2 in B, op. 37 [1877]
Gernsheim: String Quartet #1 in C minor, op. 25 [1872]
Gilbert: Tsukimi (Moon Viewing) [2013]
Gilles: Requiem [c. 1700]
Ginastera: American Preludes (12), op. 12 [1944]
Ginastera: Cello Concerto #2, op. 50 [1980]
Glanville-Hicks: Concerto Romantico for viola and chamber orchestra [1956]
Glass, L.: Piano Sonata #2 in A-flat, op. 25 [1897]
Glass: Days and Nights in Rocinha [1997] 
Glass: Piano Concerto #1 "Tirol" [2000]
Glazunov: Piano Sonata #2 in E minor, op. 75 [1901]
Gliere: Gyul'sara, including the Overture [1925]
Glière: Symphony #2 in C minor, op. 25 [1907-08]
Goehr: String Quartet #3, op. 37 [1976]
Gomes: Lo schiavo [1889]
Gordon: Yo Shakespeare [1992]
Gouvy: Octet #1 in E-flat, op. 71 [1879]
Graener: Piano Trio, op. 61 [1923]
Grainger: La Scandinavie for cello and piano [1902]
Greenstein: Clearing, Dawn, Dance [2010]
Grieg: Violin Sonata #2 in G, op. 13 [1867]
Grime: Three Whistler Miniatures [2011]
Grisey: L'Icône paradoxale [1992-1994]
Grisey: Le Temps et l'écume [1988-1989]
Gruber: Zeitstimmung (Time Shadow) [1996]
Gubaidulina: Piano Concerto "Introitus" [1978]
Guerrero: Missa Sancta et immaculata [1566]
Guillou: Hyperion, or The Rhetoric of Fire, op. 45 [1988]
Guridi: Sinfonía Pirenaica [1945]
Haas, G. F.: AUS.WEG [2010]
Haas, G. F.: Concerto Grosso #1 [2014]
Haas, G. F.: Solstices [2019]
Haas, G. F.: Trombone Concerto [2016]
Handel: Chandos Anthems, HWV 246-256 [1717-18]
Handel: Tanti strali al sen mi scocchi, HWV 197 [1711]
Harper: Fanny Robin [1971]
Harper: Symphony #2 "Miracles" [2007]
Harrison, J.: Bredon Hill: Rhapsody for Violin and Orchestra [1942] 
Harrison, M.: Revelation: Music in Pure Intonation [2001]
Harvey: Ritual Melodies [1989-90]
Hashimoto: Symphony #1 in D [1940]
Hayasaka: Piano Concerto in D minor [1948]
Haydn: English Canzonettas, Books 1 & 2, Hob. XXVIa:25-36 [1794-5]
Haydn: String Quartets, op. 71 [1793]
Haydn: Symphony #1 in D [1759]
Haydn: Symphony #2 in C [1764]
Haydn: Symphony #3 in G [1762]
Haydn: Symphony #5 in D [1762]
Haydn: Symphony #10 in D [1760]
Haydn: Symphony #11 in E-flat [1762]
Haydn: Symphony #12 in E [1763]
Haydn: Symphony #13 in D [1763]
Haydn: Symphony #14 in A [1764]
Heinichen: Flavio Crispo [1720]
Heinrich: Manitou Mysteries [1845]
Hermanson: Lyrical Metamorphosis [1957] 
Hildegard von Bingen: O Euchari [12th century]
Hindemith: Octet [1957-8]
Holliger: Dona Nobis Pacem [1968-69]
Holliger: Gesänge der Frühe [1987]
Holliger: Puneigä [2002]
Holst: Symphony in F, op. 8 "The Cotswolds" [1899-1900]
Hölszky: Dämonen [2006]
Holzbauer: Mass in C [c. 1770]
Honegger: Concerto da Camera [1948]
Hoof: Symphony #4 in B [1950]
Hosokawa: Autumn Wind [2011]
Howard: Violin Concerto [2015]
Howells: Oboe Sonata [1942]
Hurum: Bendik og Årolilja, op. 20 [1923
Ichiyanagi: Sapporo [1962]
Ifukube: Japanese Rhapsody [1935]
Ifukube: Lauda concertata for marimba and orchestra [1979]
Indy: String Quartet #1 in D, op. 35 [1890]
Ireland: Fantasy-Sonata in E-flat [1943]
Isaac: Innsbruck, ich muss dich lassen [c. 1485]


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Ten days to go here....


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

+1
Grieg: Violin Sonata #2 in G, op. 13 [1867]
Holst: Symphony in F, op. 8 "The Cotswolds" [1899-1900]

_That's all I have for you_


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

senza sordino said:


> +1
> Grieg: Violin Sonata #2 in G, op. 13 [1867]
> Holst: Symphony in F, op. 8 "The Cotswolds" [1899-1900]
> 
> _That's all I have for you_


There's a lot of good stuff there though. Try a few and see if you want to add any!


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Six days to go here.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

+7
Galilei, V: Libro d'intavolature di liuto [1584]
Grisey: Le Temps et l'écume [1988-1989]
Hildegard von Bingen: O Euchari [12th century]

+6
Gilles: Requiem [c. 1700]
Gruber: Zeitstimmung (Time Shadow) [1996]
Guerrero: Missa Sancta et immaculata [1566]
Heinichen: Flavio Crispo [1720]

+5
Froberger: Suite #18 (Partita) in G minor, FbWV 618 [mid-17th century]
Gubaidulina: Piano Concerto "Introitus" [1978]
Haydn: String Quartets, op. 71 [1793]
Hosokawa: Autumn Wind [2011]
Isaac: Innsbruck, ich muss dich lassen [c. 1485]

+4
Guillou: Hyperion, or The Rhetoric of Fire, op. 45 [1988]
Harvey: Ritual Melodies [1989-90]
Hindemith: Octet [1957-8]
Holliger: Gesänge der Frühe [1987]
Holliger: Puneigä [2002]
Indy: String Quartet #1 in D, op. 35 [1890]

+3
Glière: Symphony #2 in C minor, op. 25 [1907-08]
Gomes: Lo schiavo [1889]
Graener: Piano Trio, op. 61
Haas, G. F.: AUS.WEG [2010]
Haydn: Symphony #1 in D [1759]
Haydn: Symphony #12 in E [1763]
Honegger: Concerto da Camera [1948]
Howard: Violin Concerto [2015]

+2
Fry: Christmas Symphony "Santa Claus" [1853]
Grisey: L'Icône paradoxale [1992-1994]
Guridi: Sinfonía Pirenaica [1945]
Harper: Fanny Robin [1971]
Harrison, M.: Revelation: Music in Pure Intonation [2001]
Hashimoto: Symphony #1 in D [1940]
Hayasaka: Piano Concerto in D minor [1948]
Haydn: Symphony #5 in D [1762]
Ifukube: Japanese Rhapsody [1935]

+1
Gaito: Piano Quintet, op. 24 [1917]
Gaos: Symphony #2 "En las montañas de Galicia" [1917-9]
Gernsheim: String Quartet #1 in C minor, op. 25
Ginastera: Cello Concerto #2, op. 50 [1980]
Gliere: Gyul'sara, including the Overture [1925]
Grainger: La Scandinavie for cello and piano [1902]
Grieg: Violin Sonata #2 in G, op. 13 [1867]
Haas, G. F.: Concerto Grosso #1 [2014]
Haas, G. F.: Solstices [2019]
Handel: Chandos Anthems, HWV 246-256 [1717-18]
Harrison, J.: Bredon Hill: Rhapsody for Violin and Orchestra [1942] 
Haydn: Symphony #3 in G [1762]
Haydn: Symphony #10 in D [1760]
Haydn: Symphony #13 in D [1763]
Holst: Symphony in F, op. 8 "The Cotswolds" [1899-1900]
Howells: Oboe Sonata [1942]
Ifukube: Lauda concertata for marimba and orchestra [1979]


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

@science, how do you know these pieces well enough to vote? Or did you (re)-listen to them for the purposes of voting on this tier?


----------



## Chilham (Jun 18, 2020)

+1
Hildegard von Bingen: O Euchari [12th century]

Too beautiful to be in the basement.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> @science, how do you know these pieces well enough to vote? Or did you (re)-listen to them for the purposes of voting on this tier?


Well... "_well enough_ to vote..."

To _me_, that means I have a sense of how strongly I think they should be recommended relative to each other. It's not always, maybe not even very often, about how much I personally like a work. Particularly on these lower tiers, and with really long works (like Stockhausen's operas, for example), I consider it more than enough to have heard a fair sample of the work *and to have done some research about it*.

In this particular case, I listened to all or part of about fifteen of the works in my vote over two or three days while I built my vote. Some others (like Heinichen's _Flavio Crispo_) I've heard before and forgotten until I saw the search results! There are some works on the +1s in my vote that I haven't heard but (based on what I know about them) feel it would be wrong to harm too much (by not voting for them) in case other people think they're important enough to promote.

(Those are Gilere [except the overture, which I've heard], Grainger, Handel, Harrison, Holst, and Ifukube. I have a hunch they're a little more likely to deserve to be promoted than other works that I haven't listened to here..... Also, I can barely remember the Grieg and Haydn works, but I have a pretty good idea what they are without having to listen to them again.)

I've been doing various version of this project for about thirteen years now, and spent tens of thousands of dollars on music until I finally surrender to the youtube experience about five years ago. Many of these works have been here a while, and quite a few have been in Bulldog's games too.

So I do sometimes vote for works I haven't heard, and I think it's best for people to do that if they have reason to believe the work is famous or important enough to promote over the other works on the tier. I never used to do that, but another participant who used to be extremely active and made a lot of great contributions to this project (name of Trout) persuaded me that if I know a work should be recommended very strongly based on its reputation, then I shouldn't hold that work back just because I hadn't personally gotten around to it. (It was a short, somewhat tense exchange about six or seven years ago, and he was right and I was wrong. Like many of my TC exchanges, I hope Trout doesn't remember it as well as I do!)

If I could tell people what to do -- I can't, and don't intend to try; people should vote according to their own consciences and their own ideas about how things like this should work -- I would ask people just to research all the works on a tier at least a little and vote for the ones that seem most interesting or historically significant. To me, that is much, much, much more important than whether we happen to like a particular work or not, or how much we enjoy them relative to each other.

I just don't think our individual tastes are that important. Some people find it humiliating to think this way, but I don't mean it as an insult at all.

To take some examples from my vote, I actually enjoy all of Haas's works here more than I enjoy Hildegard's work, but there's just no doubt that Hildegard's work is sooooooooo much more famous. There are some works by Haas that I would recommend more strongly than _O Euchari_, especially _in vain_, which seems to me to be one of the most important works of our century so far. (If it were _Ordo Virtutum_ against _in vain_, that would be tough. Those are two really, really, really important works. But I'm not the only voter here, and right now we've collectively recommended _Ordo Virtutum_ about twice as strongly as _in vain_: there are 290 works recommended more strongly than _Ordo Virtutum_ but 675 works recommended more strongly than _in vain_. Still, that puts _in vain_ at the 88th percentile, which seems reasonable to me, though I will definitely want to give it points when we do the 49th tier again. Hard to say if I can though, since it's a small tier and there are a few other works there that are also really important in my estimation. Like Brumel's "earthquake" mass or Zelenka's trio sonatas. My opinion is that those works are way more famous and important than most of the works on that tier, including _in vain_; only about five other works there even have a good argument to me.)

Anyway, I think the judgment that _O Euchari_ needs to be recommended much more strongly would and could and even should be made by someone who knows about it but hasn't actually heard it. And I would welcome their vote. After all, if I hadn't heard it, but they voted for some random work that they'd just happened to hear sometime, I would feel misled. (Still, it'll balance out even if everyone only votes for works they've happened to hear, because other things being equal people are more likely to hear the more famous works. Which is why I'm a big fan of more people voting, and of people with less common tastes or more specialized knowledge voting even more!)

And maybe most of all, if I could tell people what to do, I'd urge them -- for their own sake, not for me or the project, because this project is here to help us, not to rule us -- to try a few works that are new or less familiar to them each time we do a tier. It's really sad to me to see people vote for the same kinds of works over and over again, when the tradition offers us all so, so much more. That's really the whole point, right?


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

> If I could tell people what to do -- I can't, and don't intend to try; people should vote according to their own consciences and their own ideas about how things like this should work -- I would ask people just to research all the works on a tier at least a little and vote for the ones that seem most interesting or historically significant. To me, that is much, much, much more important than whether we happen to like a particular work or not, or how much we enjoy them relative to each other.
> 
> I just don't think our individual tastes are that important. Some people find it humiliating to think this way, but I don't mean it as an insult at all.


Then why have this be a democratic process? Surely you could accomplish this goal much better by having a few individuals perform research and come to a consensus on where things should be placed...

I'm guessing most people who vote on these lists either vote either entirely or primarily based on personal preference. For me it's probably about 30% of the consideration, and I consider myself on the lower end of valuing personal preference when it comes to recommendations (other factors for me are diversity - in era, composer, location, style, instrumentation, etc. - , accessibility, historical importance, et al.). Are you assuming that the aggregate preferences of TC will arrive at works that are "interesting or historically significant"? Or do you not have any such agenda for the list beyond what you embody in your own vote (i.e. you are willing to let others decide what they think the list should represent in their own votes)? Or is it simply a matter of principle or tradition? I know you took over this project from others, so perhaps your keeping the voting structure even if it's not what you'd like best.

Oh, and by the way, I completely agree; our individual preferences are nearly meaningless in the grand scheme of things. I for one don't find that humiliating at all. Comforting, if anything.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> Then why have this be a democratic process? Surely you could accomplish this goal much better by having a few individuals perform research and come to a consensus on where things should be placed...
> 
> I'm guessing most people who vote on these lists either vote either entirely or primarily based on personal preference. For me it's probably about 30% of the consideration, and I consider myself on the lower end of valuing personal preference when it comes to recommendations (other factors for me are diversity - in era, composer, location, style, instrumentation, etc. - , accessibility, historical importance, et al.). Are you assuming that the aggregate preferences of TC will arrive at works that are "interesting or historically significant"? Or do you not have any such agenda for the list beyond what you embody in your own vote (i.e. you are willing to let others decide what they think the list should represent in their own votes)? Or is it simply a matter of principle or tradition? I know you took over this project from others, so perhaps your keeping the voting structure even if it's not what you'd like best.
> 
> Oh, and by the way, I completely agree; our individual preferences are nearly meaningless in the grand scheme of things. I for one don't find that humiliating at all. Comforting, if anything.


I think the TC crowd is pretty impressive. Although a few of the voters may not know as much as I do, others know quite a bit more, and almost all of us know something that _I_ don't. So we're all learning from each other, and if you really don't already know a few works that I've never heard of, you certainly will before very long, so then I'll be able to learn from you too.

To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you poll the voters you have, not the voters you wish to have or the voters you might have at some later time. One of the reasons for restructuring the project is that I realized that I had changed a lot since ten years ago, and I regretted how low some of the important works that I didn't know at that time were. This is better because we can all evolve together.

There is a critical mass of voters whose values are close enough to mine to make the results good for me. It reflects TC (and the defunct Amazon forum, where the original version started c. 2008), which is better than if it just reflected me. You too, it turns out: most of the things you valued are the same things I value, location being the exception. I don't think about that as I make my votes. I'd guess it takes care of itself pretty well.

I've become firmer and firmer in my opinion that TC's biggest blind spot is for medieval, Renaissance, and -- except for the really, really big names -- Baroque music. (Especially operas.) There's a lesser problem with aggressively modernist or progressive music. We're much stronger on the Classical (especially the biggest names of course, and the works and composers nearer to 1800 than to 1750), Romantic and early modern (especially conservative works) eras. (Maybe a little weaker on the operas beyond the biggest names.) Everybody loves those lush strings, pounding pianos, dramatic horns, and tearjerking melodies! Renaissance polyphony is a tougher nut for a lot of us -- me too -- to crack.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Since pjang23 liked that post, that gives me a good example of someone who I've learned a lot from. As far as I know, he's been the strongest advocate for the art song tradition among the regular participants here, and he's led me to learn a lot more about that than I would have otherwise. Because of that, on any tier where there are a few art song options, I always hope he shows up to vote. I think we've also learned a bit from each other about Renaissance works; I have the impression that he and I began exploring those in some depth at around the same time (maybe 6-8 years ago).

So that's basically how I hope this thing works!

Of course I've learned different things from each of the regular participants. Everyone seems to bring something.

(I could be specific, but I'm afraid I'd miss someone or forget something that I've learned from them and maybe that would be upsetting, so I won't take that risk!)


----------



## pjang23 (Oct 8, 2009)

The main boon of the voting process is that it allows for a pooling of knowledge and a prioritization of listening suggestions, and TC has the most in depth body of knowledge out of the communities I've found. I maintain a spreadsheet to keep track of how I rated works in previous votes and try to listen to people's top scored works if I don't know them. It's not feasible to listen to everything from start to finish, though if someone else is rating a work highly and I enjoy what I've sampled I'll give the work some votes to help it along, and make sure to revisit it when it shows up again. The restriction of the number of votes per point value requires me to relisten to works when I'm inevitably forced move things up or down to make space.


----------



## kyjo (Jan 1, 2018)

+6:
Frumerie: Symphonic Variations on Vårvindar friska, op. 25 [1940-41]

+5:
Glière: Symphony #2 in C minor, op. 25 [1907-08]
Grieg: Violin Sonata #2 in G, op. 13 [1867]

+4:
Freitas Branco: Symphony #4 in D major [1952]
Grainger: La Scandinavie for cello and piano [1902]
Howard: Violin Concerto [2015]

+3:
Guridi: Sinfonía Pirenaica [1945]
Hashimoto: Symphony #1 in D [1940]
Hayasaka: Piano Concerto in D minor [1948]
Hurum: Bendik og Årolilja, op. 20 [1923

+2:
Gaito: Piano Quintet, op. 24 [1917]
Graener: Piano Trio, op. 61 [1923]
Harper: Symphony #2 "Miracles" [2007]
Honegger: Concerto da Camera [1948]
Ifukube: Lauda concertata for marimba and orchestra [1979]

+1:
Gaos: Symphony #2 "En las montañas de Galicia" [1917-9]
Gernsheim: Piano Trio #2 in B, op. 37 [1877]
Ginastera: American Preludes (12), op. 12 [1944]
Ginastera: Cello Concerto #2, op. 50 [1980]
Holst: Symphony in F, op. 8 "The Cotswolds" [1899-1900]
Hoof: Symphony #4 in B [1950]


----------



## Highwayman (Jul 16, 2018)

+7

Gernsheim: String Quartet #1 in C minor, op. 25 [1872]
Ginastera: Cello Concerto #2, op. 50 [1980] 
Goehr: String Quartet #3, op. 37 [1976] 
Holliger: Gesänge der Frühe [1987]

+6

Galilei, V: Libro d'intavolature di liuto [1584] 
Graener: Piano Trio, op. 61 [1923] 
Hindemith: Octet [1957-8] 
Holst: Symphony in F, op. 8 "The Cotswolds" [1899-1900] 
Hosokawa: Autumn Wind [2011]

+5

Frumerie: Symphonic Variations on Vårvindar friska, op. 25 [1940-41] 
Gaos: Symphony #2 "En las montañas de Galicia" [1917-9]
Gouvy: Octet #1 in E-flat, op. 71 [1879]

Guerrero: Missa Sancta et immaculata [1566] 
Guridi: Sinfonía Pirenaica [1945] 
Hurum: Bendik og Årolilja, op. 20 [1923]

+4

Glazunov: Piano Sonata #2 in E minor, op. 75 [1901] 
Grainger: La Scandinavie for cello and piano [1902] 
Grisey: Le Temps et l'écume [1988-1989] 
Honegger: Concerto da Camera [1948]

Howells: Oboe Sonata [1942] 
Ifukube: Lauda concertata for marimba and orchestra [1979] 
Ireland: Fantasy-Sonata in E-flat [1943]

+3

Froberger: Suite #18 (Partita) in G minor, FbWV 618 [mid-17th century] 
Gilles: Requiem [c. 1700] 
Gruber: Zeitstimmung (Time Shadow) [1996] 
Haas, G. F.: Solstices [2019]

Heinichen: Flavio Crispo [1720] 
Heinrich: Manitou Mysteries [1845]
Hoof: Symphony #4 in B [1950] 
Indy: String Quartet #1 in D, op. 35 [1890]

+2

Fry: Christmas Symphony "Santa Claus" [1853] 
Gaito: Piano Quintet, op. 24 [1917] 
Glière: Symphony #2 in C minor, op. 25 [1907-08]

Grieg: Violin Sonata #2 in G, op. 13 [1867] 
Gubaidulina: Piano Concerto "Introitus" [1978] 
Handel: Chandos Anthems, HWV 246-256 [1717-18]

Hashimoto: Symphony #1 in D [1940] 
Holzbauer: Mass in C [c. 1770]
Ichiyanagi: Sapporo [1962]

+1

Freitas Branco: Symphony #4 in D major [1952] 
Grime: Three Whistler Miniatures [2011]
Guillou: Hyperion, or The Rhetoric of Fire, op. 45 [1988] 
Harper: Symphony #2 "Miracles" [2007] 
Harrison, J.: Bredon Hill: Rhapsody for Violin and Orchestra [1942]

Hayasaka: Piano Concerto in D minor [1948] 
Haydn: String Quartets, op. 71 [1793] 
Hermanson: Lyrical Metamorphosis [1957]
Hildegard von Bingen: O Euchari [12th century] 
Hölszky: Dämonen [2006]


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

+7
Gordon: Yo Shakespeare [1992]
Handel: Chandos Anthems, HWV 246-256 [1717-18]

+6
Galilei, V: Libro d'intavolature di liuto [1584]
Glass: Piano Concerto #1 "Tirol" [2000]
Isaac: Innsbruck, ich muss dich lassen [c. 1485]

+5
Greenstein: Clearing, Dawn, Dance [2010]
Harrison, M.: Revelation: Music in Pure Intonation [2001]
Haydn: English Canzonettas, Books 1 & 2, Hob. XXVIa:25-36 [1794-5]
Holst: Symphony in F, op. 8 "The Cotswolds" [1899-1900]

+4
Froberger: Suite #18 (Partita) in G minor, FbWV 618 [mid-17th century]
Glass: Days and Nights in Rocinha [1997]
Guerrero: Missa Sancta et immaculata [1566]
Hildegard von Bingen: O Euchari [12th century]
Ifukube: Japanese Rhapsody [1935]

+3
Gilles: Requiem [c. 1700]
Grainger: La Scandinavie for cello and piano [1902]
Grieg: Violin Sonata #2 in G, op. 13 [1867]
Haydn: String Quartets, op. 71 [1793]
Hindemith: Octet [1957-8]

Holzbauer: Mass in C [c. 1770]

+2
Harrison, J.: Bredon Hill: Rhapsody for Violin and Orchestra [1942]
Haydn: Symphony #1 in D [1759]
Haydn: Symphony #2 in C [1764]
Haydn: Symphony #3 in G [1762]
Haydn: Symphony #5 in D [1762]

Heinichen: Flavio Crispo [1720]
Ifukube: Lauda concertata for marimba and orchestra [1979]

+1
Freitas Branco: Symphony #4 in D major [1952]
Gruber: Zeitstimmung (Time Shadow) [1996]
Haydn: Symphony #10 in D [1760]
Haydn: Symphony #11 in E-flat [1762]
Haydn: Symphony #12 in E [1763]

Haydn: Symphony #13 in D [1763]
Haydn: Symphony #14 in A [1764]
Howells: Oboe Sonata [1942]


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

For me, the lowest tiers are the ones where I vote entirely on personal preference, and ignore anything I haven't heard before. These works (including the ones I love) are only on the bottom tier because one person has nominated them. But works further up the list have had to attract multiple supporters in order to progress, so that's when I start paying attention to unfamiliar pieces. I certainly make a conscious effort to give higher votes to works in those blind spots that science mentioned.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Well, time's up. I'll tally the votes and post the results in the main thread. 

This has been a pleasant discussion. I certainly appreciate everyone who voted here, and I appreciate your votes on the other threads as well.


----------



## JakeBloch (Mar 27, 2014)

+7
Glazunov: Piano Sonata #2 in E minor, op. 75 [1901]
+4
Handel: Chandos Anthems, HWV 246-256 [1717-18]
+3
Honegger: Concerto da Camera [1948]
Haydn: String Quartets, op. 71 [1793]
Indy: String Quartet #1 in D, op. 35 [1890]


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

You're too late! I already tallied everything and moved the works. I think everything you voted for got promoted though. 

Parts 5 and 6 are open now, if you want to vote there.


----------

