# Johann Pachelbel - Canon in D Major



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

One of the best pieces of baroque music.

What do you think? You can vote in the poll, if you want.

Original arrangement.






Cello & Piano version.






Piano solo version.






What's your favourite arrangement?


----------



## BobBrines (Jun 14, 2018)

What alloys me most about pop renditions of THE canon ignore the fact that it is a three-part canon on a ground bass and simply follow what is perceived as the melody line. I like it played on exactly three violins and a cello. I suspect that that was Pachelbel's intention.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Some 40 years ago this work became all the rage and even Top-40 music radio stations were playing it. Then it seemed every bride at every wedding wanted it played. For a lot of non-classical people, the Canon is the only piece of baroque music there is. It mindlessly shows up on commercials, in TV shows and movies. Over-exposed doesn't begin to explain it. It's one of those pieces I can do without ever hearing or playing again.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

It's a short piece, but not short enough; the repetitive nature of the work is a major negative. I gave it a "2" rating as I'm feeling generous.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

Bulldog said:


> It's a short piece, but not short enough; the repetitive nature of the work is a major negative. I gave it a "2" rating as I'm feeling generous.


Dude, it's literally a Canon, don't go complaining about repetitiveness.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

EvaBaron said:


> Dude, it's literally a Canon, don't go complaining about repetitiveness.


I don't care for the basic melody and find the imitations unappealing - so shorter would be better.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

HansZimmer said:


> One of the best pieces of baroque music.


Gave it a 2. I like it but my opinion is that there are many much better pieces in the Baroque era.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Duplicated post.................


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

It's not horrible, in its original tempo -- but also not very remarkable. But the slowed down version that got PLAYED TO DEATH by every idiot and wedding planner who wanted to sound "cultured" just totally ruined it for me.

Kinda like... Bo Derek and Ravel's "Bolero"?


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

The Muppets did the best version... with a real cannon.


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

Technically, isn't the "Canon" a Passacaglia? It sure seems more like variations over a ground bass rather than strict imitative polyphony.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

HansZimmer said:


> What's your favourite arrangement?


The tacet one...the one that never gets played....I echo mbhaub's assessment...never again would be too soon....


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

I gave it a 2. I have no need to listen to it again.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

I voted 4 , can´t remember hearing other then on funerals the last years, but who am I judging what others like. 
Funeral or otherwise.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

All funeral music HAS to be the "Adagio for Strings."


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

I think you mean Ave Maria , even non religious people do that.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> It's a short piece, but not short enough; the repetitive nature of the work is a major negative. I gave it a "2" rating as I'm feeling generous.


Wiki says that some scholars think that the piece was composed in response to Biber's canon in Partita III of Harmonia artificioso-ariosa. I bet you'll like the Biber more! I certainly do.

Here


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

It's a beautiful little work. I like the Munchinger analogue Decca recording.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Mandryka said:


> Wiki says that some scholars think that the piece was composed in response to Biber's canon in Partita III of Harmonia artificioso-ariosa. I bet you'll like the Biber more! I certainly do.
> 
> Here


You win the bet!


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

No rating. It just is.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

This music is the primary reason why I will never watch the movie _Ordinary People_ again.


----------



## VoiceFromTheEther (Aug 6, 2021)

Happily repetitive music for brains that enjoy repetitiveness more than I do.

3


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

BobBrines said:


> What alloys me most about pop renditions of THE canon ignore the fact that it is a three-part canon on a ground bass and simply follow what is perceived as the melody line. I like it played on exactly three violins and a cello. I suspect that that was Pachelbel's intention.


"Pop renditions"?

Pop music is this.






The different versions of "The Canon in D Major" are simply remakes, not pop renditions.

It seems that many persons here don't like the piece because it has spread in the popular culture, but I don't see how this would lower the value of it. 
Indeed, if a piece of classical music spreads in the popular culture it means that it's very good.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Xisten267 said:


> Gave it a 2. I like it but my opinion is that there are many much better pieces in the Baroque era.


You like it but you voted 2, which is a vote that you should give to something that you don't like.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

HansZimmer said:


> You like it but you voted 2, which is a vote that you should give to something that you don't like.


The scale is not well-defined in the OP. I understood it as:

0 - Horrible
1 - Bad
2 - Reasonable
3 - Good
4 - Very Good
5 - Great 
6 - Excellent

To me Pachelbel's _Canon_ is between _Good_ and _Reasonable_.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> Indeed, if a piece of classical music spreads in the popular culture it means that it's very good.


No, it just means that it's popular.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Not horrible, just overplayed to death. I have no time for it these days.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

The average score of the piece in this poll so far (31 votes) is *3,2*. Pachelbel's _Canon and Gigue_ at the moment belongs to the *58th Tier* at the Talk Classical Community's Favorite and Most Highly Recommended Works list.


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

I gave it a 4. It's often requested as prelude music before a wedding ... once it was the processional for a wedding I played ... had to repeat it about 12 times as there were 12 attendants, and each one though her entrance was a photo shoot and stopped at every other pew to pose for the photographers.

It's not a favorite of mine, but I'll continue to play it for weddings or funerals if asked ... take the money and laugh all the way to the bank.

It's _their_ wedding or funeral not yours. And this may be the very first time they've heard it played.

Kh


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Pachelbel's Canon has certainly left its mark. I first heard it in the early 1970s from the Musical Heritage Society disc featuring works by Johann Pachelbel and Johann Friedrich Fasch, performed by such as Maurice André, Pierre Pierlot, Jacques Chambon, and Jean-François Paillard, conductor of the J.-F. Paillard Chamber Orchestra:









In fact, MHS used to give this one away to those who joined the record club. In any case, I loved it from first hearing. I didn't realize at the time that it was less than historically correct performance-wise.

I utilized the piece for a classical dance sequence in one of the first plays on which I worked as sound designer. That was, I believe, even before the craze set in.

I still have my MHS record version, and some more authentic versions in my collection. But I do like the Paillard arrangement. I still play it every once in a while, and enjoy it immensely.

The works by Fasch are interesting, too. But for some reason they seem to have never caught on like the Pachelbel Canon has. Alas ....


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Xisten267 said:


> The scale is not well-defined in the OP. I understood it as:
> 
> 0 - Horrible
> 1 - Bad
> ...


If a vote is below 3 it means that the piece is bad: indeed votes below 3 are nearer to horrible rather than "excellent".

If a vote is equal to 3, it means that the piece is not good and not bad.

If a vote is greater than 3, it is good.

However, it seems like I still have to elaborate a scale which is clear for anyone. It's more difficult than I thought.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

I think the majority has it by a small margin.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

More like Karen in D.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

By the way ... for those of you who want your "canon" but can't quite stomach the Pachelbel, there's always this:









I'm not quite sure what key this cannon is in (maybe all of them!), but you're less likely to fall asleep to this one.

And ... for those of you who dread hearing the Pachelbel Canon mixed in with all those wedding bells, well -- you get _bells _here, too. But it ain't quite weddin' like.

I don't know if Tchaikovsky had intentions of rewriting the Pachelbel Canon in his own style, but with Dorati's recording of the Russian's Opus 49 we nonetheless get pretty close to that intention, I suggest.

Me? I'm happy to have both Paillard's Pachelbel canon music _and_ Dorati's Tchaikovsky cannon music in my collection. Both deliver adequate bang (and boom) for the buck.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Influence on popular music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pachelbel's_Canon#Influence_on_popular_music
"In 2002, pop music producer Pete Waterman described Canon in D as "almost the godfather of pop music because we've all used that in our own ways for the past 30 years"."


----------



## Shaughnessy (Dec 31, 2020)

FYI...

Don't try this with a real chicken.

Don't ask me how I know this.

Until I can find a way to tell the story in a manner which doesn't make me look and sound "stupid".

I shall answer no further questions.

So don't ask... seriously... Thanks!


----------

