# Which Era of Classical Music is Best?



## TrazomGangflow (Sep 9, 2011)

Medieval, Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, or 20th century. Which is best in your opinion and why?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Romantic because it's corny, cheesy, and allows me to be lazy in my listening.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Has to be Romantic, if composers as early and late as Schubert and Scriabin are included. That's just too huge a chunk of what I listen to for anything else to compete.

A lot of people dismiss the era as overblown, sentimental drivel, etc, but I have a sneaking suspicion a lot of them don't fully understand capital R Romanticism and are basing their opinion more on the lower-case version of the word than any intimate understanding of the music. If you want pretentious artifice, listen to how joy was expressed in the Classical era. Dum dum dee dee doo doo...


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

There is no best, there's only what you like.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

The 21st century because it wasn't mentioned in the OP, so it's obviously the underdog here that needs support like an awkward teenager needs compliments.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I probably listen to Romantic and modern more than the others, but if you put Beethoven in the classical period, my two favorite composers are from that period. It's really hard to choose since I think I could listen to the music of any one period for months without feeling as though I'm missing anything.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

A lot of people dismiss the era as overblown, sentimental drivel, etc, but I have a sneaking suspicion a lot of them don't fully understand capital R Romanticism and are basing their opinion more on the lower-case version of the word than any intimate understanding of the music. If you want pretentious artifice, listen to how joy was expressed in the Classical era. Dum dum dee dee doo doo...

Hmmm... you start out complaining about how some people dismiss Romanticism as overblown and sentimental and suggest they probably lack a real grasp of the music... and then you turn around and completely undermine everything you have said by mocking the "pretentious artifice" of the Classical era in a manner that suggests an equal ignorance of that era.

Personally, I cannot choose a "best" era. I am most experienced in Romanticism and the Baroque, but I have more than a passing interest in Medieval, Renaissance, Classical, Modern, and Contemporary music as well and I have heard enough from every era to recognize that there were musical giants and music of real genius in each and every era.

A thread some time ago asked a similar question... but perhaps in a better way: If we could only ever listen to the music from a single 100 year period of time, what dates would you choose? At that time I chose the dates 1722-1822. This would assure me most of Bach (including the Well Tempered Clavier, the Cello Suites, the Suites for Solo Violin, and all the major choral work), a good deal of Handel (including _Alexander's Feast_, the _Messiah, Giulio Cesar_, etc...), the whole of Mozart and Haydn, a majority of Beethoven's major works (although I'd lose the 9th symphony and the late quartets) and a good amount of Schubert (including all the symphonies except the 9th, a good many lieder, etc...), etc... Even so, I'd greatly miss Monteverdi, Josquin, Donizetti, Bellini, Wagner, Chopin, Brahms, Mahler, Richard Strauss, and much more so that I'm glad I don't need to make such a decision.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

The 21st century because it wasn't mentioned in the OP, so it's obviously the underdog here that needs support like an awkward teenager needs compliments.

A bit hard to pit the last 11 years of music against eras lasting centuries in some instances.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

If I could lump the high baroque with its transition into the preclassical, that would be my pick. Then I get everything from Corelli and Vivaldi through Bach, Scarlatti, Telemann, Handel ect. on to Boyce, and Bach's eldest two sons. Baroque music is so pure and consistently interesting. 

That's what I like. Second place for me is first half of 20th century, particularly music that can be considered post romantic or neo romantic.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

regressivetransphobe said:


> If you want pretentious artifice, listen to how joy was expressed in the Classical era. Dum dum dee dee doo doo...


I am one who loves the Romantic, but I would like to accuse you of not having an affinity for the Classical period. Its not pretentious, that's just what you think mister, and maybe one of these days you'll stop railing and take up an open minded curiosity. Haydn bashing always rubs me the wrong way, he's the best.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

Yeah, uh...what was that era The Godfather of Harmony was in again?...yeah, that one...


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

clavichorder said:


> Haydn bashing always rubs me the wrong way, he's the best.


I intentionally didn't mention any names because I'd like to avoid further scuffles with the local autism patrol.  (I don't mean you, you haven't got too bent out of shape.)


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

The era lasting 1813 to 1883.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

regressivetransphobe said:


> I intentionally didn't mention any names because I'd like to avoid further scuffles with the local autism patrol.  (I don't mean you, you haven't got too bent out of shape.)


Yes, my autism is more covert and I relatively socially well adjusted after early intervention, I'm glad you noticed. Humor and flattery accepted, we can keep this quiet now.


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

Errr... if by 'best' you mean 'favourite' then I'd have to say Romantic. Late Beethoven was really Romantic, so that makes it include three out of four of my favourite composers. (Bach, Beethoven, Schumann, and Chopin)


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

I think the classical period is in fact my favorite; the philosophy of the time demanded that music elevate the positive emotions (happiness, good humor, etc.) and subdue the negative emotions. I like it because it puts me in a good, productive mood. To call it 'pretentious artifice' _is_ sheer ignorance. Pretentious? The whole movement of the classical period was rooted in a desire for simplification of baroque-era music! :lol: That's why classical period music has transparent textures, clear form and phrasing, etc.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

> Pretentious? The whole movement of the classical period was rooted in a desire for simplification of baroque-era music!


Not to drag this out, but I don't think you know what pretentious means.

Yikes, I'm totally innocent and I keep striking nerves.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

regressivetransphobe said:


> Not to drag this out, but I don't think you know what pretentious means.
> 
> Yikes, I'm totally innocent and I keep striking nerves.


Well, looks like you got what was coming to you.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

I'll have to say... anything composed between 1865-1936. Seriously. Anything by any composer. That was the golden age of music, particularly in Russia.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

With me it's the 20th century (in terms of my favourite, not necessarily "the best"). But generally, I can't say "no" to any of the "big names" in classical music (depending on what work/s of theirs you're talking about). I've even got some begrudging admiration for guys who aren't usually my thing, eg. J.S. Bach (his _Double Violin Concerto _has bought me to tears in the concert hall, this rarely if ever happens), Wagner (his _Siegfried Idyll _is one of my favourite chamber works of all time) & R. Strauss (his post-WW2 works are amongst my favourites from that period).

BTW, I think member *regressivetransophobe* was being flippant/joking about the "Classical Era," I don't think he was really being serious in "dissing" it that way. But if he'd said it about some post-1945 composer, no-one would bat an eyelid...


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

regressivetransphobe said:


> Not to drag this out, but I don't think you know what pretentious means.


I'm perfectly clear as to what it means, and so are you, and you know you're wrong about this. So.. please stop posting about things you know nothing about. Thanks.


----------



## HerlockSholmes (Sep 4, 2011)

Whichever era with the largest quantity and the best quality of fugues in it. In other words, Baroque.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

TrazomGangflow said:


> Medieval, Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, or 20th century. Which is best in your opinion and why?


Medieval - Too kinky.
Renaissance - Maybe for when reading Shakespeare
Baroque - Besides Bach and Handel I find most of the Baroque a write-off.
Classical - I like Mozart's operas, _but I do not like Haydn!!_
Romantic - There's some stuff here.
20th Century - Was looking great at first, then Schoenberg went and ****ed it up.

So Romantic.


----------



## Meaghan (Jul 31, 2010)

Couchie said:


> Medieval - Too kinky.


Right? I mean, plainchant, sacred motets... sooo kinky. Also, there were shawms.

(??)


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Meaghan said:


> Right? I mean, plainchant, sacred motets... sooo kinky. Also, there were shawms.
> 
> (??)


Easy there, I'm starting to get turned on.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> The 21st century because it wasn't mentioned in the OP, so it's obviously the underdog here that needs support like an awkward teenager needs compliments.
> 
> A bit hard to pit the last 11 years of music against eras lasting centuries in some instances.


Normally I would agree with you...but in this case, since my answer was purely a joke...


----------



## Nix (Feb 20, 2010)

20th century- particularly pre 1950. Because the music community was large enough that there was a wide variety of styles, but small enough that the composers still all seemed to know each other and could provide us with plenty of sassy jibes.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

I think this thread could be better worded as which is your _favourite_ era, in which case this topic would almost have certianly been addressed before with wide ranging and interesting opinions.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

For me it's a toss up between High Baroque for the unsurpassed choral works of Handel and Bach and early Modernism (Schoenberg until Shostakovich) for realising that music can be ugly but not forgetting that it can also be beautiful. Though I suppose Beethoven got there first, so I'll also nominate Late Beethoven which I consider as a period on it's own.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

1756-1791...


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

1833-1834. You can sense a cosmic shift in that year because, although his music is yet to exist, little babby Brahms had been born.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Polednice said:


> 1833-1834. You can sense a cosmic shift in that year because, although his music is yet to exist, little babby Brahms had been born.


Good example of why correlation does not imply causation.

In fact, scientists have established that cause of the cosmic shift originated in Leipzig, not Hamburg, when a certain other German composer was born in 1833 _do you know the one I'm thinking of Mr. Polednice?_


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

Meaghan said:


> Right? I mean, plainchant, sacred motets... sooo kinky. Also, there were shawms.
> 
> (??)


don't make me link you to a medieval bondage site..


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Couchie said:


> Good example of why correlation does not imply causation.
> 
> In fact, scientists have established that cause of the cosmic shift originated in Leipzig, not Hamburg, when a certain other German composer was born in 1833 _do you know the one I'm thinking of Mr. Polednice?_


Alexander Borodin was born in Leipzig?!


----------



## Charon (Sep 8, 2008)

Probably the classical period for me.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Polednice said:


> Alexander Borodin was born in Leipzig?!


... Maybe all three were the same person under different pseudonyms


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Couchie said:


> ... Maybe all three were the same person under different pseudonyms


The Holy Trinity!!


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

Wagner is not omnipresent, Couchie.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I liked Stlukes idea of choosing the best 100 year period. Actually I think it would be agonizing. His choice of 1722-1822 would be pretty good but losing late Beethoven and Schubert might be too much. I think I would go with 1728 - 1828.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I liked Stlukes idea of choosing the best 100 year period. Actually I think it would be agonizing. His choice of 1722-1822 would be pretty good but losing late Beethoven and Schubert might be too much. I think I would go with 1728 - 1828.

Those few years one way or the other were a tough trade-off. Moving forward to 1828 I would gain Beethoven's 9th and his late string quartets, as well as Schubert's 9th, his late piano sonatas, and the late lieder... especially the _Wintereisse_. This was not enough, however, for me to give up Bach's Cello Suites, Solo Violin Sonatas, Orchestral Suites, and book I of the Well Tempered Clavier as well as Handel's _Giulio Cesare_, Vivaldi's _Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'inventione_, _La cetra_, and the last works of Alessandro Scarlatti. It's bad enough that I already lost the whole of Biber, Buxtehude, Lully, and Monteverdi.:lol:

Now I go listen to this to remind myself the Biber is not lost:


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

mmsbls said:


> I liked Stlukes idea of choosing the best 100 year period. Actually I think it would be agonizing. His choice of 1722-1822 would be pretty good but losing late Beethoven and Schubert might be too much. I think I would go with 1728 - 1828.


On the opposite end you'd loose out on Corelli, and Vivaldi. I do like this hundred year period idea. 1712 to 1812, that way I catch the Corelli concerto grossi and end with Beethoven's 7th. It also helps that I love so much in between.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

When I was younger, I listened to music to be emotionally moved, and most of the music that moved me was written in the Romantic era (with a few classical, and a few modern pieces thrown in).

As I've gotten old, I listen more for pure aural pleasure, and I can find that anywhere, from Elizabethan Consort music to Jon Liefs, John Adams and Joan Tower.

As far as I'm concerned, there is no best era.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Now I go listen to this to remind myself the Biber is not lost:


If you haven't, then you might also like to try these two magnificent pieces by him and maybe these versions, too (on period instruments).


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Those few years one way or the other were a tough trade-off. Moving forward to 1828 I would gain Beethoven's 9th and his late string quartets, as well as Schubert's 9th, his late piano sonatas, and the late lieder... especially the _Wintereisse_. This was not enough, however, for me to give up Bach's Cello Suites, Solo Violin Sonatas, Orchestral Suites, and book I of the Well Tempered Clavier as well as Handel's _Giulio Cesare_, Vivaldi's _Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'inventione_, _La cetra_, and the last works of Alessandro Scarlatti. It's bad enough that I already lost the whole of Biber, Buxtehude, Lully, and Monteverdi.:lol:





clavichorder said:


> On the opposite end you'd loose out on Corelli, and Vivaldi. I do like this hundred year period idea. 1712 to 1812, that way I catch the Corelli concerto grossi and end with Beethoven's 7th. It also helps that I love so much in between.


I feel your pain; hence, the choice is agonizing.


----------



## presto (Jun 17, 2011)

Each of us is drawn to a particular style and period, I love a very wide range of music but I personally keep coming back the Baroque.


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

I really can't see how any era is 'better' than any of the others, let alone 'best'. I listen to music of many genres. Within the field of 'classical' music (western art music), I listen to anything from Machaut (14th century) to yesterday afternoon. Every period of music has its fascinations and its great composers. Why on earth would one want to try to pretend that one was 'better' than all the others? Rejoice in the variety of music over the last 700 years and embrace it all. By concentrating on one era (or ignoring any of them), one deprives oneself of so much beautiful music.


----------



## Pierrot Lunaire (Dec 16, 2010)

Modernism is the greatest period because you get to listen to most of the people on this forum tell you ridicluous and overwrought explanations on why the music you love is the most terrible thing ever. Like I don't understand it or something.


----------



## TrazomGangflow (Sep 9, 2011)

Many people overuse the word pretentious when describing music. Using that word doesn't make you sound more educated.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

TrazomGangflow said:


> Many people overuse the word pretentious when describing music. Using that word doesn't make you sound more educated.


The last time I was pre10tious was when I was in the third grade.
In the fourth grade I was con10tious.
By the time I got to fifth grade, I was post10tious.


----------



## haydnfan (Apr 13, 2011)

I don't care much for pre-baroque music. As for the rest of the eras I like classical era the most, but it's a like most out of equals kind of like.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

starthrower said:


> There is no best, there's only what you like.


You're reading my mind. Nothing else I have to add.

Martin


----------



## chrisco97 (May 22, 2013)

The Romantic era is my favourite. Almost all of my favourite composers are from the Romantic era.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Delicious Manager said:


> By concentrating on one era (or ignoring any of them), one deprives oneself of so much beautiful music.


But if a listener does not like the Baroque or Classical Eras, they're not missing out on anything. Maybe in your view they are but I think that's a negative way of looking at things. In the end, people listen to music they enjoy and whether or not they're 'missing out' on something you happen to like and appreciate really isn't that important. It's certainly not worth arguing over. That's for sure.

(I know this is in response to an old post but I had to say something )


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Romantic, as quickly explained by the following list

My favourite composers (in order)

Robert Schumann
Frederic Chopin
Johannes Brahms
Felix Mendelssohn
Ludwig van Beethoven
Edvard Grieg
Franz Liszt
Franz Schubert
Antonin Dvorak
Pyotr Tchaikovsky


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

2nd Century BC is my favourite but those recordings are now very worn and don't play so well, so I go with the 20th century


----------



## Marisol (May 25, 2013)

TrazomGangflow said:


> Medieval, Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, or 20th century. Which is best in your opinion and why?


I simply cannot compare them, it is like comparing apples and pears, they are too different.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Marisol said:


> I simply cannot compare them, it is like comparing apples and pears, they are too different.


different, true, but which do you _like_ better, apples or pears? I like pears a lot, although there are times when I'd rather have an apple.


----------



## Marisol (May 25, 2013)

deggial said:


> different, true, but which do you _like_ better, apples or pears? I like pears a lot, although there are times when I'd rather have an apple.


That is a different question than "what is the best...".

But to answer this question: I like them all.


----------



## Conor71 (Feb 19, 2009)

I will put them in order of most liked to least:
Modern/Romantic (tie)
Renaissance/Medieval (tie)
Baroque
Classical


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I don't know about best, but Romantic has the widest range.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Baroque, Classical, and Romantic for me. Depends on my mood. The big 3.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

clavichorder said:


> Haydn bashing always rubs me the wrong way, he's the best.


Clavichorder, while you wrote this 1.5 years ago, I'd still like to add my voice to this. Haydn was a giant, even if not in terms of stature.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

My admittedly hasty survey of this thread indicated that the great polyphonic composers haven't been singled out for special praise. So I'll do it:

Roman School; Burgundian School; Venetian School. They're all marvelous.

Okay, the deed is done.

...

If absolutely forced to choose a best, I would choose the Classical Era: say, Mannheim School up to Beethoven? A messy time demarcation, but it's serviceable enough!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Novelette said:


> Clavichorder, while you wrote this 1.5 years ago, I'd still like to add my voice to this. Haydn was a giant, even if not in terms of stature.


Indeed. Let me tout a new and VERY good set of the complete Haydn keyboard sonatas, and cheap. Did I mention that it was cheap?

http://www.amazon.com/Haydn-The-Pia..._shvl_album_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369549962&sr=301-1


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Marisol said:


> That is a different question than "what is the best...".
> 
> But to answer this question: I like them all.


but what best else can _best_ mean in the context of comparing apples and pears? one has more vitamin C, the other more sugar. It depends what you need, eg. what you like, when it comes to the arts.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Well obviously right now since I'm around and composing :3


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

For me it is now! Easily, coz this is the first time in history music from all periods are readily available!

/ptr


----------



## Aquos (May 26, 2013)

Difficult question!!! It depends on the mood, but I normally hear boroque works...


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Indeed. Let me tout a new and VERY good set of the complete Haydn keyboard sonatas, and cheap. Did I mention that it was cheap?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Haydn-The-Pia..._shvl_album_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369549962&sr=301-1


Really weird. I had a look at this and saw that the US is selling it for $10 about £6.60 for mp3's and $100 for about £66 or CD's. The UK pricing is better for CD's at only £34 while the mp3s cost £45 - about $68.

I wonder if you can buy the mp3's in the US for UK use and the CDs in the UK for US use.

Oh, and the disc says 9 CDs and there are track listing for 9 CDs but Amazon says that it contains 8.

Nice set of discs though thanks for the recommendation.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

The Baroque Era: the marzipan in the chocolate box of music. But it's nice sometimes to sample the caramel (early music), the fudge (classical) & the orange cream (romantic); also the nut (= some era or other).


----------



## oogabooha (Nov 22, 2011)

21st century for sure (or postmodern I guess--just recent music). can't think of anything more vital to music at the moment. The romantic, baroque, renaissance, medieval, classical, modern, etc. music that I thoroughly enjoy will always be there, but I can't think of more variety, mystery, and interesting music than what's happening _right now_


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

Classical, romantic, late romantic and early modern


----------

