# Who Is The Earliest Composer You Listen To With Any Frequency?



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

Probably it's Jean-Baptiste Lully (born 1632) for me. He's the earliest composer that actually sounds like Baroque music to my ears. I respect Machaut, Dufay, Josquin, Palestrina, Byrd, etc., but I've got to be honest, with the possible exception of G. Gabrieli and "Spem in Alium" by Tallis, I have a hard time really loving music prior to the mid-Baroque, specifically, the second half of the 17th century before Vivaldi, Handel, Bach, D. Scarlatti, Rameau and Telemann came along and ushered in the final (and greatest phase) of the Baroque. Edward Elgar regarded British music before Purcell (including Byrd) as "museum pieces", and while that may be a harsh judgement, I can't really say I feel much differently about Classical music before around 1650 (at the earliest) or so. Anyway, Lully was born in 1632, meaning he was active in the second half of the 17th Century. Starting in the 1630s through into the 1640s and 1650's so a big wave of composers many of whom are widely known and popular to this day, including Lully, Buxtehude, Biber, M.A. Charpentier, Marais, Pachelbel, Corelli, Purcell, Torelli, etc. 

Anyway, whether you agree with my tastes in music concerning the 16th Century isn't really what is motivating this thread. What I want to know is WHY you think I might feel this way. Clearly, something big was going in since so many noteworthy and still-popular composers were born in such tight chronological formation and seemed to share a generally more flamboyant and more secular style of music than what came before. Granted, some of these composers have only be re-discovered by the public relatively recently, but even so, but there seems to be a bit of a brick wall for some CM listeners (myself included) to music written in the first half of the 16th Century to push my interests backward in time much further. Try as I might over many years, I just can't seem to push my interest back a whole lot further than the this, Gabrieli (and probably Scheidt as well) being exceptions. It just seems to me music after mid-century was more alive and memorable than even Monteverdi, whom I certainly respect - and even like a bit, but never to the same extent. Can any one give some technical reasons as to why this might be so?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Depending on the limit of "any frequency", it's likely Schumann.


----------



## Ras (Oct 6, 2017)

John Dowland and Giovanni Gabrieli.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

From the back of my head: Pierre de la Rue


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

My tastes in CM between 1650 and 1950 are fairly catholic, by which I mean "broad or wide-ranging in tastes, interests, or the like; having sympathies with all; broad-minded; liberal." not Catholic (as in the religion). Maybe I should qualify "any frequency" as music that satisfies my musical taste buds to the point that I seek it out, choose to cultivate an interest in it, collect on CD, etc. - meaning I care to revisit it on occasion.


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

Not familiar with Pierre la Rue, but from the sound of it he sounds pretty early. What time frame was he active in?


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

Dowland isn't too bad, either, but only Gabrieli and Scheidt really get my juices flowing from an earlier period than what I specified in my OP.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

christomacin said:


> Not familiar with Pierre la Rue, but from the sound of it he sounds pretty early. What time frame was he active in?


( Born Kortrijk Belgium 1450 - Kortrijk, short before 20 November 1518)


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

OK, so he was a Renaissance guy. I was thinking Middle Ages - Pierre La Roue sounded like a good troubadour name.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

JS Bach or Vivaldi.


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

I'm a Machautphile. I regularly listen to his music and have often gone through periods where I'll listen to nothing else. Compositional organization on Color and Talea is a method that deserves respect, but gets no love on TC where there is a low opinion of the Ar$e Nova composers. While I can't make anyone appreciate the unique terroir of a fine burgundy, I'll continue to offer a glass in hopes that an observer may note it has "legs."


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

The Ars Subtilior - Solage, Baude Cortier, Grimace, etc


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Anonymous, I suppose.


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

premont said:


> Anonymous, I suppose.


There is a line of modern day "historical thought" that identifies Anonymous as T.B.Player!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Hildegard von Bingen.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

The earliest work I listen to more often is Taverner's Western Wynde Mass, speculated to be written around 1530. I still find de Prez incredibly boring. I always tune out after a while and nothing ever strikes my ears.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

J.S. Bach - mainly the solo instrumental works. As far as I'm aware the earliest music I have is the op.6 concertos by Corelli but they don't get played too often. Back in the day I dabbled with music which predated the Late Baroque era just to see if I could further broaden my horizons but I never took to it.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Notker Balbulus maybe.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

I listen to Perotin a few times a year, don't know if that counts as "any frequency."

I listen to Josquin, Tallis, Byrd, Taverner, Palestrina and Gombert more often.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

The earliest composer I listen to with any frequency is Beethoven.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Art Rock said:


> Hildegard von Bingen.


I'll second that.

I find this master's music to be simply sublime. Notable in my personal collection is the following:









A fine set, that.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

Mandryka said:


> Notker Balbulus maybe.


OK, you w-w-w-win  9th century?!? had to google the name

is there an earlier named composer with surviving music?


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I've been listening to more Renaissance music lately so I would probably say Dufay and Ockeghem. I used to view Baroque as significantly more enjoyable than Renaissance, but now I might view them as similar. I do very much like some works by de Machaut, but I don't listen often enough.



Mandryka said:


> Notker Balbulus maybe.


Any recommendations?


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

mmsbls said:


> I've been listening to more Renaissance music lately so I would probably say Dufay and Ockeghem. I used to view Baroque as significantly more enjoyable than Renaissance, but now I might view them as similar. I do very much like some works by de Machaut, but I don't listen often enough.
> 
> Any recommendations?


I know three recordings with substantial amounts of the music, and I've inserted images below. Joppich very much takes his time to let the musical gestures be felt. So this makes me wonder how their tempos were determined. And how the details of their expression, of note formation etc -- the vocality and sonority of their singing-- were determined. The booklets to Morent and Vellard are full of paleographic stuff, but they are disappointingly silent about their performance decisions, I don't have the booklet to Joppich (can someone upload it for me?)


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bwv 1080 said:


> is there an earlier named composer with surviving music?


Alcuin. There's only one thing I know, very good too, the last track here


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> The earliest work I listen to more often is Taverner's Western Wynde Mass, speculated to be written around 1530. I still find de Prez incredibly boring. I always tune out after a while and nothing ever strikes my ears.


This is a new Taverner CD which I like very much, college choir in the English tradition, I rather like that in this music.









The most virtuoso Taverner mass is Missa Corona Spinea, well worth hearing.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Hildegard for me.


----------



## DBLee (Jan 8, 2018)

With any frequency? Late baroque--Vivaldi, Bach, Handel, Rameau, Telemann.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Guillaume de Machaut, primarily his chansons.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Guillaume de Machaut. I do enjoy Hildegard but I can't say I listen to her music (or any truly monophonic music) with "any frequency". Pérotin is great too but I don't listen to him as much as I should.


----------



## josquindesprez (Aug 20, 2017)

Machaut for me too. After him, probably Solage and then Dufay (who I listen to a bit more than either of the others).


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

I enjoy Og from the Pleistocene Age. His early stuff is pretty standard but in his late period after the development of opposable thumbs his music is sublime.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

josquindesprez said:


> Machaut for me too. After him, probably Solage and then Dufay (who I listen to a bit more than either of the others).


I was going to say the same about Dufay. Great composer.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Composers I listen to regularly seems to imply more than one or two works? That probably makes Machaut the earliest but I do listen to the few records I have of 12th and 13th century music (including Perotin) and, of course, Hildegard's Ordo Virtutum. Much of this is relatively new to me - it has been an important area of exploration for me over the last year or so.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Ockeghem, but mostly due to one piece: his requiem. I have yet to explore a lot of his music.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

I'll say Josquin, but I don't know his exact dates. Overall, Renaissance music is a part of my regular listening, but pre-Renaissance is not.


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

Olias said:


> I enjoy Og from the Pleistocene Age. His early stuff is pretty standard but in his late period after the development of opposable thumbs his music is sublime.


His composing career didn't really get rolling until he invented the wheel, though.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Nereffid said:


> Hildegard for me.


I join the three other members in Hildegard von Bingen, is 1098-1179 early enough. Incredibly avantgarde music for the day and as a woman composer she just ignored all glass ceilings of the day.

I have the affordable and top notch CD set of her music by Hildegard's 'houseband' Sequentia, this one:


----------



## Josquin13 (Nov 7, 2017)

Hildegard von Bingen, via Sequentia's recordings, mostly (especially their album "Canticles off Ecstasy": 



 . But I wouldn't say with any frequency. Nor do I listen to Perotin & Leonin's music that often either, but I do play it, from time to time--via the recordings by David Munrow's The Early Music Consort of London (from a box set entitled, "Music of the Gothic Era": 



), The Hilliard Ensemble (Perotin on ECM), and Red Byrd (Leoninus on Hyperion). The music of Perotin and Leonin can be very repetitive, like Philip Glass, so it's not music that I'm regularly in the mood for, at least not in larger doses.

I probably listen more frequently to recordings of certain musical codices: such as the Ivrea Codex: https://www.amazon.com/Machaut-Motets-Music-Wickham-Clerks/dp/B00000J2SJ, Codex Calixtinus: 



, and Chantilly Codex, etc.:














I also avidly listen to the music of Guillaume de Machaut & Philippe De Vitry (whose music is represented in the Ivrea codex) and Johannes Ciconia, but not quite "frequently"--more so on the occasional binge. Here are some of my favorite albums of their music:

De Vitry, Motets: 



Machaut, Motets: 



Machaut, Motets: 



Ciconia, Opera Omnia: 




The earliest composer that I return to most often is probably Josquin Desprez (not surprisingly). Josquin is one of my top 5 composers in music history. So too is Guillaume Dufay (along with J.S. Bach, G.F. Handel, & W.A. Mozart, if anyone's curious). I'd say those two are the earliest composers that I listen to on anything resembling a frequent basis (as well as possibly Johannes Ockeghem, John Dunstable, & Thomas Tallis).

Here are the two Josquin albums that I listen to most often:

& this 'desert island' disc more so than any other CD of early Renaissance music: 




as well as De Labyrintho's magnificent recording of Josquin's Missa Gaudeamus: 




But the truth is I make a conscious effort not to listen to my favorite composers frequently, because it's important to me to save their music for special listening. I don't want to ever grow tired of their works due to an increasing overfamiliarity, as I have with certain works by other composers, which I don't enjoy quite as much as I used to (such as Brahms 4 Symphonies, for example). Rather, I try to take long breaks away from my most cherished composers. Which isn't a problem, since there is so much other great music to listen to. I could listen to a different piece of music every day, for years. There's so much to explore, and still so much music that I've yet to hear.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Josquin13 said:


> The music of Perotin and Leonin can be very repetitive,


I must say I think that Perotin is done a great disservice by Hilliard and Munrow.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

Bach. If you exclude Bach, it's a little bit of Mozart (basically just his operas) then everything else I listen to is Beethoven or later. Not much interested in early music, and Bach is the only baroque composer that interests me.


----------



## Josquin13 (Nov 7, 2017)

Mandryka said:


> I must say I think that Perotin is done a great disservice by Hilliard and Munrow.


I'm surprised to hear you say that. Are there any vocal ensembles that you feel have done justice to Perotin's music? (I don't think I know any other recordings...)


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

My earliest on a regular basis is de Cabezon.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Josquin13 said:


> I'm surprised to hear you say that. Are there any vocal ensembles that you feel have done justice to Perotin's music? (I don't think I know any other recordings...)


Vellard -- there are a couple of CDs, for example






Tonus Peregrinus also worth hearing


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> My earliest on a regular basis is de Cabezon.


I wonder whether you've had a chance to hear Leon Berben play Cabezon on a medieval organ.


----------



## Antiquarian (Apr 29, 2014)

On a regular basis... probably Joaquin Des Prez. And by this I mean possibly one or two days a month I will listen to him.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Probably Bach. I have to be in a particular mood to listen to pre-Baroque music. There are plenty of composers from this time frame that I love though, I just don't listen to them on a weekly/monthly basis. One of the things about pre-Baroque (or really pre-classical even) music that makes it a little bit less engaging to me is how our modern perception of "the artist" relates to how we listen to music. I love following the developmental progress of a composer and how their music changes and evolves over time. It's like, after Beethoven, every symphony, every string quartet, every piano sonata is a new artistic, individualistic vision and that's just not something you get out of earlier music because of the role of music in society at that time. Earlier pieces are beautiful and amazing from a great composer but it' all kind of cranked out samey, business-like matter compared to later.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

violadude said:


> Probably Bach. *I have to be in a particular mood to listen to pre-Baroque music.* There are plenty of composers from this time frame that I love though, I just don't listen to them on a weekly/monthly basis. One of the things about pre-Baroque (or really pre-classical even) music that makes it a little bit less engaging to me is how our modern perception of "the artist" relates to how we listen to music. I love following the developmental progress of a composer and how their music changes and evolves over time. It's like, after Beethoven, every symphony, every string quartet, every piano sonata is a new artistic, individualistic vision and that's just not something you get out of earlier music because of the role of music in society at that time. *Earlier pieces are beautiful and amazing from a great composer but it' all kind of cranked out samey, business-like matter compared to later.*


I feel that way too. Having to decide which Palestrina mass, Albinoni concerto, Bach partita, or Mozart serenade to listen to could be harder than deciding what color T-shirt to wear. At least with T-shirts you can see the color before you put it on; you don't have to try to remember the color and speculate on whether it's the look you'll want today. But then, given the essential similarity of so much "early music," you can often just grab a musical "T-shirt" at random and it'll be fine. So maybe it's not a problem.

Huh. Before today it never occurred to me that programming music could be simpler than getting dressed in the morning. I learn so much on this forum.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

violadude said:


> Earlier pieces are beautiful and amazing from a great composer but it' all kind of cranked out samey, business-like matter compared to later.


I don't find this to be true. I'm not sure if it is something that was suggested at some point to try and elevate Beethoven's status as an 'artist', or perhaps to excuse the fact that later composers tended to be less prolific than earlier ones, however from my listening experience great composers tend to have distinct voices and have a lot of diversity in their output regardless of era.

I think one tends to notice the diversity in composers they enjoy most and listen to often, while the ones we are less interested may appear to sound 'samey'. There are a number of late classical/Romantic composers whose works sound very samey to me, but these are composers I tend to listen to less.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Just to speak from my experience, composers who have inspired my imagination enough to incite me to listen carefully to their music have revealed themselves to be full of variety. Composers who have inspired me less, sound workmanlike. I like to flatter myself and think that this is because they really are workmanlike, and that I don't like their music because of a fundamental weakness in the compositions. But in fact it may be the result of _my_ weakness, a fatal combination of _my_ arrogance and _my_ ignorance.

If you take a composer like Gombert, the Gombert motets. I can well understand why someone might think, like violiadude, that they're all much of a muchness. They aren't, of course, all the same. There is sensitivity to the different texts he's setting and there are different musical gestures. But it takes an understanding of the text to appreciate it and it takes a knack of listening to long sections of through composed polyphony. Without taking the trouble to acquire the requisite skills and understanding, the music will just go over your head.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Mandryka said:


> I must say I think that Perotin is done a great disservice by Hilliard and Munrow.


Ca dépend. In Perotin's great four part organa Munrow stretches the expression to a sublime dancing and ecstatic quality among other things because of the insistent rhythms. I do not know if this approach is historically unfounded, but it is none the less fascinating.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

premont said:


> Ca dépend. In Perotin's great four part organa Munrow stretches the expression to a sublime dancing and ecstatic quality among other things because of the insistent rhythms. I do not know if this approach is historically unfounded, but it is none the less fascinating.


Like André Isoir's Art of Fugue! :devil:


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Mandryka said:


> Like André Isoir's Art of Fugue! :devil:


Not necessarily. Rather like Walcha's gigues of the fifth and sixth English suites. :angel:


----------



## BobBrines (Jun 14, 2018)

The only early Baroque composer I listen to with any regularity is Dario Costello.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

premont said:


> Not necessarily. Rather like Walcha's gigues of the fifth and sixth English suites. :angel:


Your just too quick for me! :tiphat:


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

While I own a handful of Renaissance CDs, that is music from the Renaissance and not CDs that are 400 years old, the earliest music I listen to with any frequency is the music of Corelli, Vivaldi and Bach.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

In instrumental classical, I don't really go back before Beethoven. In opera I will go all the way back to Monteverdi.


----------



## Guest (Dec 14, 2019)

Monteverdi is my most frequently heard composer of earlier times, but I also listen to Josquin, Machaut and others of the Renaissance.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

violadude said:


> Probably Bach. I have to be in a particular mood to listen to pre-Baroque music. There are plenty of composers from this time frame that I love though, I just don't listen to them on a weekly/monthly basis. One of the things about pre-Baroque (or really pre-classical even) music that makes it a little bit less engaging to me is how *our modern perception of "the artist" relates to how we listen to music.* I love following the developmental progress of a composer and how their music changes and evolves over time. It's like, after Beethoven, *every symphony, every string quartet, every piano sonata is a new artistic, individualistic vision* and that's just not something you get out of earlier music because of the role of music in society at that time. Earlier pieces are beautiful and amazing from a great composer but *it' all kind of cranked out samey, business-like matter compared to later.*


I can see where you're coming from, but I feel that through craftsmanship and melodic, harmonic, contrapuntal, motivic invention, Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart etc still have a LOT of variety in their oeuvre. Rather, I find that, after getting familiar with the level of craftsmanship of works such as Handel oratorios (especially Messiah) and Bach Lutheran masses, (and the best of the cantatas such as the 54th), 
Dvorak's and Berlioz's Requiems are a chore to listen to. (I'm also indifferent to Brahms' German Requiem. Verdi does have a few interesting bits though.) Sorry, I find all those long-winded successions of dragged-out, uninspired melodies just lackluster.
In my view, the Romantic artists were too obsessed with making their pieces sound different, they missed something very important.
I once listened to Tchaikovsky's vespers, (All-Night Vigil) wondering what this great Russian had to say in his Romantic spirit. -- I hate to say it, but I was disappointed. They sound far more business-like and devoid of expression than the great pre-Romantic masters' masterpieces: I just don't hear the level of expressive depth as Mozart's vespers (K321, K339). I feel that, even though the great pre-Romantic masters were obligated to write for the church and liturgy, they actually put their heart into the religious music they wrote.






I wouldn't want to listen to every single "show-piece" by Liszt or every single song by Schubert or every single waltz or polka by the Strausses just because they (allegedly) all sound "different from one another" under the influence of Romantic ideals. Because that's not what ultimately interests me.
Crowd-pleasers after Beethoven's time were no different in concept from crowd-pleasers before Beethoven's time. They were all crowd-pleasers designed to suit the taste of the public of their respective times. All the saying about "how art changed with Beethoven or Romanticism or whatever" has been greatly exaggerated.
Carl Philip Emmanuel Bach wrote in his keyboard fantasie piece, "CPE Bach's own feelings".
Mozart wrote in the dedication letter (to Haydn) of his 6 string quartets, "MY six children".

What's the basis for saying every one of Schubert's pieces sound different? If you look at song and the string quartet of the same name, "Death and the Maiden". Or have you looked at how many times Beethoven uses the Eroica theme in his works? Or how many times he uses his his famous 4-note motif, even after his Viennese predecessors had used them (Haydn 100th symphony, Nelson Mass, & Mozart string quartet K421, Fantasie K475). Or how derivative the first movement of his esteemed last piano sonata Op.111 is of his own earlier sonatas Op.13, Op.57 and Mozart K475, K546? They still sound different in terms of development? Sure, but I can argue the credo of Mozart's Missa Brevis K192 sounds different from the final movement of Symphony K551 contrapuntally even though they build on the same motif. Doesn't Choral Fantasie seem redundant after Beethoven composed the 9th?






















Whatabout Chopin and his miniatures? The similarities of the B major middle sections or movements in his late extended works?


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

...........Vivaldi...........


----------



## Rangstrom (Sep 24, 2010)

On a regular basis: Biber, but lately I've been exploring consort music by Gibbons, Byrd, Jenkins and Lawes.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

Probably Schoenberg.

I believe he was born the earliest of any composer I listen to on a regular basis.


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

Ockeghem, probably. Not a huge fan of the 'spiky' Medieval aesthetic, even isorhythmic Dufay is a bit too close to that for my liking. But with Ockeghem something like modern music takes shape for the first time, at least how I see it.

Plus Ockeghem was an absolutely genius composer, of course, arguably the greatest of the entire Renaissance period.


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

Well, Corelli (b. 1653) was several decades older than the Vivaldi (b. 1678) and Bach (b. 1785), so that would put your start date back into the 1670s or so.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I'll listen occasionally to Leonin and Perotin but prior to Guillaume Dufay, Hildegard of Bingen is probably the composer I listen to most. Of course there are also any number of works by anonymous composers of the medieval era that I also enjoy. Hildegard and Dufay are probably the two composers of the period I play the most

I listen quite a bit more to the composers of the Renaissance: John Dunstable, Josquin des Prez, John Taverner, Thomas Tallis, Palestrina, Orlande de Lassus, William Byrd, Giovanni Gabrieli, Carlo Gesualdo, John Dowland, Michael Praetorius, Monteverdi, etc... with Gesualdo and Monteverdi being the two composers I listen to most.


----------



## bz3 (Oct 15, 2015)

Probably Purcell.


----------

