# 5961379824 - number to call LvB, do you have another number?



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

This is the number that I rank LvB's symphonies in terms of personal interest, musical appeal and emotional value. Everyone is different and should be subjective, what is you number?


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

One that is easy to remember:
987654321


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

657348219 in 15 character or more.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

How about: 678954321


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

Art Rock said:


> 657348219 in 15 character or more.


Surprise to see 9 is your last.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Tastes differ. Fortunately.

Surprised to see you list the 9th twice.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

This is difficult...I'm obsessively in love with all of Beethoven's symphonies! :lol: Oh well, here goes: 365974821


----------



## Guest (Mar 3, 2017)

5-7-6-9-8-3-4-2-1 After a lot of changes ,it has no realy value,I love them all.:tiphat:


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

753698412. The first two could easily change places next week (and change back again the week after) but otherwise the list is pretty steady.


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

Art Rock said:


> Tastes differ. Fortunately.
> 
> Surprised to see you list the 9th twice.


I put 2 '9's to make it look like a 10-digit number.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

975368421

The first 2 places are pretty much fixed. The others could change slightly and have over time.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Surprised to see 7 consistently higher over 3 in most so far. To me the other way around.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

666666644. Call after 8 PM.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

hpowders said:


> 666666644. Call after 8 PM.


Reader's Digest edition?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Richard8655 said:


> Surprised to see 7 consistently higher over 3 in most so far. To me the other way around.


So many people ,each his/ her own taste.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Pugg said:


> So many people ,each his/ her own taste.


Yes. That's what makes CM interesting to share and discuss.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

The last nine digits of Pi


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

763598421
Like others this might change next week but the first 3 will likely remain consistent if not in the same order


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I go with 956347821

I think we have had this ranking thread before, but proceed with it as it is fun to do over again anyway.


----------



## OperaChic (Aug 26, 2015)

598637142

............


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

senza sordino said:


> The last nine digits of Pi


Let me know when you figure them out. You'll go down in math history--or crackpot history! :lol:


----------



## RRod (Sep 17, 2012)

963578214

Now can we do the same for string quartets using hexadecimal?


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

We should do one for his PC, only 5 digits.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

pcnog11 said:


> We should do one for his PC, only 5 digits.


Start a new topic/ poll .


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

I called all numbers in this thread, no answer. LvB got a new number and here it is: 357948621


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Ludwig forgot to turn on vibration mode, so he won't be answering your calls.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

900000004

Have to create some distance from first to 2nd favourite.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

pcnog11 said:


> We should do one for his PC, only 5 digits.


For Beethoven's piano concertos, my ranking is 53412.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Bettina said:


> For Beethoven's piano concertos, my ranking is 53412.


For the PC's mine is exactly 54321.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Right now it's 956738214

The only two symphonies that don't change positions are 9 and 5.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

DiesIraeCX said:


> Right now it's 956738214
> 
> The only two symphonies that don't change positions are 9 and 5.


I would second that but also would include #6 in not changing position.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

Has anyone tried dialing any of these numbers?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

regenmusic said:


> Has anyone tried dialing any of these numbers?


Can't find the right country and area code.


----------



## lluissineu (Dec 27, 2016)

Animal the Drummer said:


> 753698412. The first two could easily change places next week (and change back again the week after) but otherwise the list is pretty steady.


I like them all, and I keep on listening to them in different recordings, but if I had to rank them I agree in The 3 first places, so:

753498162.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Pugg said:


> Can't find the right country and area code.


Maybe works better for lottery ticket?


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

Bettina said:


> For Beethoven's piano concertos, my ranking is 53412.


PC number is 51342


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

For me 35421 will do


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

regenmusic said:


> Has anyone tried dialing any of these numbers?


Beethoven will answer the call.


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

It depend on the country, roaming charges may apply.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

pcnog11 said:


> It depend on the country, roaming charges may apply.


Doesn't matter as long I get the right person on the phone.


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

Wonder how would Beethoven rank his symphonies?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

pcnog11 said:


> Wonder how would Beethoven rank his symphonies?


Just for starters.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

2-3-6-5-7-1-4-9-8


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Razumovskymas said:


> 2-3-6-5-7-1-4-9-8


That's a courageous rating. I always thought 2 was underrated and also like it very much. Good to take one's own path.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Richard8655 said:


> That's a courageous rating. I always thought 2 was underrated and also like it very much. Good to take one's own path.


My courage is legendary!


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

Here is mine 397658421


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Nevum said:


> Here is mine 397658421


That is a pretty good number. But I can't put 7 that high. I never found what was so special about 7 or 8 but recently got excited about #4. Definitely ends with ...21


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

pcnog11 said:


> Wonder how would Beethoven rank his symphonies?


Ah, if we only knew. But I wonder how Mahler and Wagner and others ranked Beethoven's symphonies. Maybe time for some Googling.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Nobody put nr 2 higher then the 7th place except me??????? 

Did anyone actually listen to the 2nd symphony? Or is rating an early Beethoven work high just too much of a risk of being seen as a complete amateur?

Ok, we've all read that the eroïca was his first really big symphony and that he changed the world of music with that one and that the 5th and the 9th are his true masterpieces and the 7th is truly a piece of joy and "real" connaisseurs will also mention the 6th and the 8th and the 4th but come on, no one praising the 2nd. I'm so disappointed in TC! 

And yeah sure that 1st one is truly a piece of cr*p


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Razumovskymas said:


> Nobody put nr 2 higher then the 7th place except me???????
> 
> Did anyone actually listen to the 2nd symphony? Or is rating an early Beethoven work high just too much of a risk of being seen as a complete amateur?
> 
> ...


Love the first movement of the 2nd Symphony, one of my favourites. In Ludwig's symphonies it is only the 9th that I like every movement (least is actually the ode to joy, I'm with Stravinsky). Always like the 1st movement, and usually the 2nd; 3rd and 4th are usually boring to me, in his symphonies.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

Florestan said:


> Ah, if we only knew. But I wonder how Mahler and Wagner and others ranked Beethoven's symphonies. Maybe time for some Googling.


I read somewhere that someone once asked Beethoven which his favorite was. He said "Eroica." The other expressed surprise "that it was not the C-Minor." "Eh, nein, Eroica," he replied.

The Dramas: 5397
The Comedies: 648
Ignorance and Apathy (Don't Know; Don't Care): 1 or 2


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Totenfeier said:


> I read somewhere that someone once asked Beethoven which his favorite was. He said "Eroica." The other expressed surprise "that it was not the C-Minor." "Eh, nein, Eroica," he replied.
> 
> The Dramas: 5397
> The Comedies: 648
> Ignorance and Apathy (Don't Know; Don't Care): 1 or 2


I like how you've divided your lists. I can definitely see the humor in 6 and 8. I'm not convinced about 4, though. What's funny about it?


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Bettina said:


> I like how you've divided your lists. I can definitely see the humor in 6 and 8. I'm not convinced about 4, though. *What's funny about it*?


There is quite a lot of wit in the finale.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

Well, not funny really, but happy, satisfied, balanced, joyous.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Totenfeier said:


> I read somewhere that someone once asked Beethoven which his favorite was. He said "Eroica." The other expressed surprise "that it was not the C-Minor." "Eh, nein, Eroica," he replied.


 Yes, I recall reading that, but also that this conversation was before the Ninth was composed.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Florestan said:


> Yes, I recall reading that, but also that this conversation was before the Ninth was composed.


Beethoven was speaking to the English composer Cipriani Potter, who visited him in Vienna in the 1817-1818 time frame. If Beethoven had been asked the same question in 1825, would he have given the same answer? Maybe, maybe not!


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

My number is 359476821.


----------



## bz3 (Oct 15, 2015)

I'll go 936875412.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

695378124.

No idea why 4 is last. It just leaves me cold. 6 first? It's a time-out from all my worries, regrets and struggles to sing a hymn of gratitude to life. How did he come up with such a miracle of beneficence? There's simply nothing like it, in Beethoven or anywhere else.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

For me, it's 3 and 7 tied at the top. Next come 8, 5, 1, 9, 4, 6, 2.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> 695378124.
> 
> *No idea why 4 is last.* It just leaves me cold. 6 first? It's a time-out from all my worries, regrets and struggles to sing a hymn of gratitude to life. How did he come up with such a miracle of beneficence? There's simply nothing like it, in Beethoven or anywhere else.


It's okay. The important thing is that you do have the big four up front. Interesting you put #6 first, but you are right, there is simply nothing like it. Really I struggle with 6, 9, an 5 as to which is my favorite. But #3 definitely follows those three.


----------



## Rys (Nov 26, 2016)

hmm, 367954281, I don't know no.1 enough to properly rank it


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Rys said:


> hmm, 367954281, I don't know no.1 enough to properly rank it


Fair enough reason.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Beethoven's 2nd was noted in its day as "tremendous," "colossal." Of course the Eroica hadn't come along yet. Grove notes that it was well appreciated, though not considered as "safe" as the 1st.

It has great flashing fiddle-work in the first movement, but also a fair amount of padding, something that goes away entirely in later Beethoven.


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

I wonder if the order will change if we have this tread a year from now.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

My order changes every day. But It seems a little dodgy to have the 9th appear twice in the thread title.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> My order changes every day. But It seems a little dodgy to have the 9th appear twice in the thread title.


Needs 10 digits for a U.S. phone number anyway. Maybe that is why nobody has reached Beethoven yet: only dialing 9 digits.

BTW, I'll take two Ninths!


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

pcnog11 said:


> I wonder if the order will change if we have this tread a year from now.


Or in two years time, when someone digs up this thread.


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

6,3,4,5,7,8,9........

Ry Cooder (yes I know its a cover).....puts me in the same good mood that the (oddly enough) missing Beethoven symphonies do!


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

Florestan said:


> Needs 10 digits for a U.S. phone number anyway. Maybe that is why nobody has reached Beethoven yet: only dialing 9 digits.
> 
> BTW, I'll take two Ninths!


In my OP, there is 2 nines. Make it sounds like a real number.


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

581739246

Even if I got Beethoven's number, I don't speak German, so I would need a Babel fish or something.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

pcnog11 said:


> In my OP, there is 2 nines. Make it sounds like a real number.


but maybe in Beethoven's day, phone numbers only had 9 digits. :lol:


----------



## JamieHoldham (May 13, 2016)

6-3-9-7-8-5-4-3-2-1

my love of nature and the pastoral symphony comes first


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Florestan said:


> but maybe in Beethoven's day, phone numbers only had 9 digits. :lol:


You must be a young sprout. Customer-dialed area codes weren't implemented across the US until 1966. My home's number in the 1950s had seven digits (or characters): BLackstone 12815. 5-digit numbers were usually preceded by a word, the first two letters determining which holes in the dial you used. So, BL12815.

Want long distance? Call the operator and check your wallet.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> You must be a young sprout. Customer-dialed area codes weren't implemented across the US until 1966. My home's number in the 1950s had seven digits (or characters): BLackstone 12815. 5-digit numbers were usually preceded by a word, the first two letters determining which holes in the dial you used. So, BL12815.
> 
> Want long distance? Call the operator and check your wallet.


Nope, an older and gnarled sprout am I. As a kid my postal code was two digits. My phone number was Tiffany something and so started T I followed by 5 numeric digits. In the 60s our cottage even had a party line.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Florestan said:


> Nope, an older and gnarled sprout am I. As a kid my postal code was two digits. My phone number was Tiffany something and so started T I followed by 5 numeric digits. In the 60s our cottage even had a party line.


My home was on a two-party line. If it rang once, it was for the MacDonalds across the street. Double rings were for us. It was considered quite impolite to pick up your phone and listen to your neighbors talking. Of course, we kids never did that!


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

397564812 would be how I go. I considered dropping 8 lower because I don't like the Menuetto at all, but the first and second movements make up for it some.

The party line was a great source of entertainment in my neighborhood. Everyone listened in to everyone else. It was like a trip to the beauty shop.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

My order is 963754821


----------



## Jacred (Jan 14, 2017)

395674821
The extension including piano concerti is ext. 54312.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Jacred said:


> 395674821
> The extension including piano concerti is ext. 54312.


Did anyone ever notice the similarity of the main themes in the first movements of the Eroica and Mozart's Symphony no. 39? Same key and same notes in the theme.


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

3 9 7 5 1 4 6 8 2


----------



## Tchaikov6 (Mar 30, 2016)

768359421.

I have no idea why I like 8 more than 5 or 9, but it just seems more interesting- whereas the finale of the ninth can get a bit static for me (much like several Mahler movements) and the fifth doesn't really "draw me in." It doesn't have the emotion that I like about the seventh and the sixth. But this is just my opinion- I still consider 5 and 9 "greater" symphonies.


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

Many of us are conductors, please identify yourself when you post these numbers. Thanks.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

Piano concerti: 43512 though 1 and 2 are in a virtual tie for me. There's just nothing like the opening of the 4th.


----------



## Francis Poulenc (Nov 6, 2016)

3-9-5-6-7-2-8-4-1


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Francis Poulenc said:


> 3-9-5-6-7-2-8-4-1


congratulations! you're the first one (besides me) to put the 2nd in his top-6

I hope this is a sign of a revival of the 2nd symphony!!!! 

apart from the 9th your row is one of the few that makes some sense to me.


----------



## Francis Poulenc (Nov 6, 2016)

Razumovskymas said:


> congratulations! you're the first one (besides me) to put the 2nd in his top-6
> 
> I hope this is a sign of a revival of the 2nd symphony!!!!
> 
> apart from the 9th your row is one of the few that makes some sense to me.


It's a great symphony, particularly the end of the first movement and the finale of the whole thing.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

pcnog11 said:


> Many of us are conductors, please identify yourself when you post these numbers. Thanks.


They've all taken a break for now.


----------



## EarthBoundRules (Sep 25, 2011)

Excellent, another reason to re-listen to these! I'll report back tomorrow after I've ranked them. For now I'll just say that my top two are 9 and 3.

Also, while I waited, I thought I'd try to see what the general consensus was for these symphonies, so I assigned points to each symphony to make a list:

1st symphony in each person's list - 8 points
2nd - 7 points
3rd - 6 points
4th - 5 points
5th - 4 points
6th - 3 points
7th - 2 points
8th - 1 points
9th - 0 points

This gave me the following order of preference:

1st place: Symphony No. 3 (178.5 points)
2nd place: TIE between Symphony No. 9 and Symphony No. 5 (both 171 points)
4th place: Symphony No. 7 (163.5 points)
5th place: Symphony No. 6 (157 points)
6th place: Symphony No. 8 (99 points)
7th place: Symphony No. 4 (69 points)
8th place: Symphony No. 2 (39 points)
9th place: Symphony No. 1 (34 points)

Unfortunately there were two people who I couldn't score (Totenfeier and Jim prideaux) either because they didn't rank every symphony, or because they didn't use a linear method. One person (Haydn75) had a tie for their #1 symphony (ranking the rest in the normal order), so I split the points between them (giving the 3rd and 7th symphonies 7.5 points each).

I found this very interesting - I suspected the heavy drop between 5th and 6th place (since Beethoven's 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th and 9th are often favoured higher than the others) but I thought 9th would come out 1st for sure due to its popularity. Hope you guys find it just as interesting!


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Thanks for an interesting post.

I'm actually not surprised the "Eroica" came out top. It did the same in a recent BBC Music Magazine poll of musicians to find out which they thought was the greatest symphony of all, not restricted to Beethoven, and there are a lot of posters on this board with a great deal of musical knowledge and training.

The Choral symphony is an interesting case. Many people do rate it very highly, but I for one share Vaughan Williams' view of it, namely that it's clearly a very great work which I nonetheless find much easier to admire than to like (in its first three movements anyway - the Finale I love), and if there are two of us who take that view there will be others as well, whether or not they're willing to admit it publicly.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

.....................................


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

..............................................


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

.......................................


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

EarthBoundRules said:


> Excellent, another reason to re-listen to these! I'll report back tomorrow after I've ranked them. For now I'll just say that my top two are 9 and 3.
> 
> Also, while I waited, I thought I'd try to see what the general consensus was for these symphonies, so I assigned points to each symphony to make a list:
> 
> ...


Thanks for the analysis. Good summary of the ratings. I am surprise to see No. 1 scored the last place. However, the tie between No. 5 and No. 9 are most people's struggle.


----------



## Fugue Meister (Jul 5, 2014)

Here is my order to throw the statistics off:

938726145


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

For me it's: 849236715


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

65497218 is my number to ring.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

ArtMusic said:


> 65497218 is my number to ring.


Tried, you weren't answering.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Fugue Meister said:


> Here is my order to throw the statistics off:
> 
> 938726145





Andolink said:


> For me it's: 849236715


Yikes! Two in a row with the Fifth last! You guys must have been supersaturated with the Fifth to the point of burnout.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

ArtMusic said:


> 65497218 is my number to ring.


Something missing here. What, no 3rd? I thought sure that would make everybody's list.


----------



## lehnert (Apr 12, 2016)

I have not heard Beethoven's Symphonies no. 2 and no. 4 yet.

If I omit these two then my number is 9573861.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

lehnert said:


> I have not heard Beethoven's Symphonies no. 2 and no. 4 yet.
> 
> If I omit these two then my number is 9573861.


Well you should at least give #4 a listen.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Florestan said:


> Well you should at least give #4 a listen.


Famous last words.


----------



## lehnert (Apr 12, 2016)

Florestan said:


> Well you should at least give #4 a listen.


I definitely will.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

pcnog11 said:


> This is the number that I rank LvB's symphonies in terms of personal interest, musical appeal and emotional value. Everyone is different and should be subjective, what is you number?


I've been playing the 4th the most lately. I am not sure that there is a least interesting option.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

I abjectly apologize for my leaderboard-wrecking nonlinearity , and repent by playing fair: 

539764821


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Well, something like:

374196528


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Never gave a serious number for this. It is 942756381


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

I am waiting for someone who's going to digest this numbers and make a result list.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Well volunteered, that man.


----------

