# Why Didn't the Greats Ever Compose For Guitar?



## kamalayka (Sep 8, 2012)

I know that the guitar wasn't well known (or respected), but some of their music sounds so great on the instrument!


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Hmm! Dont' know what you mean by great but 




and there are others. Vivaldi wrote for the lute and is often transcribed to guitar.

Have a look at http://musicated.com/CGCL/music/CGCL_chron.html to see a lot more.


----------



## worov (Oct 12, 2012)

Does this mean that Villa-Lobos is not a great composer ?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Paganini did you know.


----------



## Prodromides (Mar 18, 2012)

worov said:


> Does this mean that Villa-Lobos is not a great composer ?


You beat me to the punch, worov - this is exactly what I was going to say.

Y'know the definition of "Great" means 1) caucasian, 2) male, 3) German or Austrian, 4) deceased + 5) surname beginning with the letter "B".

There has only ever been 3 Great composers: Bach, Beethoven & Brahms. 

Perhaps kamalayka should re-phrase the thread question to: why didn't any dead German white guys write extensive repertoire for the guitar?


----------



## Praeludium (Oct 9, 2011)

They began to write for guitar in the XXth century, but did not care about guitar in the classical and romantic eras.
Before that there was the renaissance and baroque lute, the vihuela and the baroque guitar (amongst others), which have quite a lot of interesting repertoire. Isn't Dowland a great composer ? 

Takemitsu, for instance, wrote many masterpieces for guitar.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Prodromides said:


> ..Y'know the definition of "Great" means 1) caucasian, 2) male, 3) German or Austrian, 4) deceased + 5) surname beginning with the letter "B".
> 
> There has only ever been 3 Great composers: Bach, Beethoven & Brahms.


And Beethoven & Brahms places are only due to an accident of Birth.


----------



## TudorMihai (Feb 20, 2013)

Even Berlioz didn't compose a Guitar Concerto, even though he was a proficient classical guitarist. During the Baroque period the only composer who gave the guitar some attention was Vivaldi (he wrote music for lute, but today is performed on the guitar). I think that one of the few pre-20th century composers that used the guitar in their works was Mahler (see the 4th movement of the 7th symphony).


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I would agree with others who have suggested that many great composers _have_ composed for the guitar. As to why it wasn't as common for earlier composers to write for the instrument, I'm not sure I know the answer to that but I would imagine that if those old composers could have somehow realized the popularity the instrument would gain in the 20th century and on, many more would have composed for it.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Prodromides said:


> You beat me to the punch, worov - this is exactly what I was going to say.
> 
> Y'know the definition of "Great" means 1) caucasian, 2) male, 3) German or Austrian, 4) deceased + 5) surname beginning with the letter "B".
> 
> ...


Well I just don't know ,you forgot BOZART didn't you !!


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Praeludium said:


> Takemitsu, for instance, wrote many masterpieces for guitar.


Yeah... but, sadly, he fails in points 1) and 3). Sorry, we would do something, but, you know...


----------



## worov (Oct 12, 2012)

Guitar was a very popular instrument in Spain. Spanish composers did write fo guitar.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I suppose this doesn't really count, but the Mahler 7th calls for a guitar in the 4th movement. It's not really a work for guitar, though . Rossini's Barbiere di Siviglia has a part for guitar in Almaviva's serenade to Rosina in the opening scene . 
And of course, the late Spanish composer Joaquin Rodrigo wrote celebrated works for guitar such as his" Fantasy for a gentleman" and Concierto Andaluz etc.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

moody said:


> Well I just don't know ,you forgot BOZART didn't you !!


I'm surprised nobody commented on the glaring omission of Bagner yet...


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

De falla composed a lot for guitar. Britten composed the Nocturnal, that is considered one of the most important pieces for the instrument.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

During the Baroque period the only composer who gave the guitar some attention was Vivaldi (he wrote music for lute, but today is performed on the guitar).

Well, if you are counting the lute, there were a hell of a lot of Renaissance and Baroque composers who wrote for that instrument... including J.S. Bach:

Orlande de Lassus
John Dowland
Robert De Visee
Sylvius Leopold Weiss
Wolff Jacob Lauffensteiner
Johannes Hieronymus Kapsberger
Melchior Neusidler
Marco dall Aquila
Ennemond Gaultier
Nicolas Vallet
Jacques Gallot
Charles Mouton
Francois Couperin
Johann Jakob Froberger
Denis Gaultier

And what about Fernando Sor for later guitar music?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Hans Werner Henze wrote interesting guitar music. He was white and German, so he may qualify as great, heh, heh!


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Guitars are relatively quiet. I imagine it's difficult to write a concerto for one: you'd have to worry about it being overwhelmed by the orchestra.

The instrument was very strongly associated with Spain until relatively recently, so German and Austrian composers probably didn't concern themselves with guitars too much for the same reason Spaniards wrote relatively little alphorn music.


----------



## waldvogel (Jul 10, 2011)

Nobody's mentioned Mauro Giuliani? The only works that I know from him are written for either solo guitar, or for guitar and orchestra. 

I know, I know, he doesn't fit the narrow definition of "great". On the other hand, he fits right in with most of the other names mentioned here.


----------



## wolf (May 16, 2009)

There is a reason that Mozart, Bach and Beethoven didn't write for guitar, saxophone (they wouldn't have, even if it had been invented then), or mouth-organ. And that Rembrandt or Rafael didn't do any Californian art, nor did Shakespeare or Tolstoi wrote cheap trash novels...:lol:


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

wolf said:


> There is a reason that Mozart, Bach and Beethoven didn't write for guitar, saxophone (they wouldn't have, even if it had been invented then), or mouth-organ. And that Rembrandt or Rafael didn't do any Californian art, nor did Shakespeare or Tolstoi wrote cheap trash novels...:lol:


The first part of your post is just speculation on a hypothetical situation (what instruments composers would have written for had they been invented) your idea is impossible to prove, so, just conjecture. As far as the analogy it does not make any sense as you are comparing different genres with an instrument. The quality of a composition is dependent on the content of the composition, not on the instrument it was written for.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

waldvogel said:


> Nobody's mentioned Mauro Giuliani? The only works that I know from him are written for either solo guitar, or for guitar and orchestra.
> 
> I know, I know, he doesn't fit the narrow definition of "great". On the other hand, he fits right in with most of the other names mentioned here.


Whatever your definition of "great" is, it is largely subjective and I would likely have a very different idea of what composers would be included under that term.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

The "greats" probably wrote for whatever musicians were at hand. 

Sometimes I think these things are a matter of mere fashion and tradition too. One could as well ask why there are no concertos for vibraphone. (I know you folks will probably find one by the great Luigi von Sibeliustein now.) Or celeste - Bartok notwithstanding. Or why have two or three percussionists waiting around for the moment of their virtuoso cymbal crashes or clippy-cloppy wood block passages (20th century and later only) instead of one guy behind a drum kit? There are fads and trends in the oh-so-creative genius classical music realm just as in the more popular genres.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Weston said:


> One could as well ask why there are no concertos for vibraphone.


That's an easy one: because it was invented in 1921.


----------



## stanchinsky (Nov 19, 2012)

Probably because it was unknown to most composers, and even if it was known, they may have been unaware of how to write for it.


----------



## wolf (May 16, 2009)

tdc said:


> The first part of your post is just speculation on a hypothetical situation (what instruments composers would have written for had they been invented) your idea is impossible to prove, so, just conjecture. As far as the analogy it does not make any sense as you are comparing different genres with an instrument. The quality of a composition is dependent on the content of the composition, not on the instrument it was written for.


I was aware of that....:lol::tiphat:


----------



## worov (Oct 12, 2012)

> One could as well ask why there are no concertos for vibraphone.


One could as well ask why there are no concertos for triangle.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Concerto for vibraphone and orchestra.


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

Because Piano is better


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

stanchinsky said:


> Probably because it was unknown to most composers, and even if it was known, they may have been unaware of how to write for it.


I doubt very much the first. And if they weren't sure how to write for it I'm sure they could have learnt.

The real problem I'm sure was that there weren't great guitarists available to commission and inspire works. No great cellists either often, that's why there aren't that many pieces written specifically for a cellist in some periods and places.


----------



## kamalayka (Sep 8, 2012)

I don't define "great" by a composer's ethnicity.

But let's cut the political correctness, please.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

kamalayka said:


> I don't define "great" by a composer's ethnicity.
> 
> But let's cut the political correctness, please.


Okay. Toru Takemitsu was a great composer, and he composed for guitar. Therefore (cutting through political correctness here), your thread title rests on a false premise.


----------



## stanchinsky (Nov 19, 2012)

starry said:


> I doubt very much the first. And if they weren't sure how to write for it I'm sure they could have learnt.
> 
> The real problem I'm sure was that there weren't great guitarists available to commission and inspire works. No great cellists either often, that's why there aren't that many pieces written specifically for a cellist in some periods and places.


I take your point, and agree that the fact that there wasn't any great guitarists around to inspire or commission works would have left little demand for the music, but how would they learn if there were no accomplished guitarists to teach them? How would they know the technical limitations of the instrument, without really being shown what the instrument could do? To make matters worse the guitar had 'standardization' problems when it came to the size, tuning and number of strings (depending on the time period)


----------



## Guest (Mar 25, 2013)

*Why didn't the greats ever compose for guitar?*
Beethoven did!
An die Geliebte in C, WoO 140, for Voice and Guitar (December, 1811)


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

^ Cool, he would have done more if he had access to a stack of Marshall's too, I would hasten to say.....


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

stanchinsky said:


> I take your point, and agree that the fact that there wasn't any great guitarists around to inspire or commission works would have left little demand for the music, but how would they learn if there were no accomplished guitarists to teach them? How would they know the technical limitations of the instrument, without really being shown what the instrument could do? To make matters worse the guitar had 'standardization' problems when it came to the size, tuning and number of strings (depending on the time period)


The virtuoso they were writing it for would inform them what it could do. If there weren't any then as I said that explains why there weren't many works. Mozart composed for a glass [h)armonica and I'm sure needed some explanation from it's player as to how to write for it.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Guitar is so hard for the non-guitarist to write for....that's why there are a whole bunch of "guitarist-composers."


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

That could well be but I'm sure some composers would have taken on the challenge had it been worth their while monetarily. Places like Spain had plenty of guitarists to write for as well.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Guitar is so hard for the non-guitarist to write for....


Why is that?


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)




----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

starry said:


> That could well be but I'm sure some composers would have taken on the challenge had it been worth their while monetarily. Places like Spain had plenty of guitarists to write for as well.


Vienna was the guitar centre of the world during the golden age of guitar music.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

ahammel said:


> Why is that?


It just is, probably to do with the complexities of fingerings and chord shapes and stuff like that...a lot of the time non-guitarists when composing for guitar always have to check their work's playability with guitarists. I know Britten had this problem and at one point in "Nocturnal' Julian Bream noticed that Britten had inadvertently written two notes to be played at the same time but which could only have been played on one string.


----------



## Minona (Mar 25, 2013)

If you're talking early music, the fretted lute was the guitar of its day and had double frets for meantone tunings that could also accompany other instruments. Composers never accepted equal temperament until late C19th, so the guitar couldn't have been used to support other players. I'm sure it would've have been accepted as a solo instrument but how does a musician make is bread and butter? 

Why didn't the Xylophone get used much? Sometimes it's just the way things work out.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Minona said:


> Why didn't the Xylophone get used much? Sometimes it's just the way things work out.


Unavailable in Europe before about the 1860's. _Danse Macabre_ was the first piece of European orchestral music scored for one.


----------



## Minona (Mar 25, 2013)

Mmmm, well they were importing exotic instruments into Europe since ancient times. I can't imagine someone could invent a glass armonica, a glockenspiel, etc and not think of chime bars or something like a xylophone. I don't think wooden ones would have been accepted.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

I think the resonators were the trick that lead to its being used in orchestral music. It's too quiet otherwise.


----------



## hindsight (Mar 25, 2013)

The guitar simply wasn't that popular an instrument back in the "Greats" era. One might as well ask why they didn't write more music for mandolin/bouzouki/banjo which were far more popular at the time.

The modern classical guitar only settled into its existing form and size (single-coursed, six-string) towards the end of the 19C, and the innovations in soundboard bracing that made it louder at that time are no doubt responsible for its rise in popularity.

Still it wasn't loud enough to contribute meaningfully in ensemble settings eg. jazz, the eventual solution being electrical amplification. That's when it really took off. Even up to the 20s, Gibson was primarily a *mandolin* manufacturer.

Stupid, ridiculous instrument.

So, is everyone looking forward to Dave Mustaine performing Wagner with the San Diego SO next year?


----------



## Minona (Mar 25, 2013)

Because a guitar was then a lute. Lots of 'lutes' were used in the Renaissance and baroque. Then keyboards dominated the same role. 

I find it stranger that fretless guitars/lutes are so rarely played (in the west )to this day! Seems a perfectly valid instrument for any music to me.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Fretless basses are the most popular of the type.


----------

