# What are the 5 greatest opera's ever written?



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

In your opinion of course.
If you need to list more fine, but
try to put your top 5.
Thanks


----------



## Monsalvat (11 mo ago)

I'll start with (in any order): _Tristan und Isolde_, _Don Giovanni_, _Otello_, _Die Zauberflöte_, and _Die Walküre_, but this is clearly a product of my own biases.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Itullian said:


> In your opinion of course. put your top 5.


So how is this different from <What are your 5 favorite operas?>, another thread of yours? 








What are your 5 favorite operas?


i'm thinking on mine, go ahead please.




www.talkclassical.com


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

hammeredklavier said:


> So how is this different from <What are your 5 favorite operas?>, another thread of yours?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually, I was once asked to list 3 operas I love most versus 3 operas I think are the best. I quickly selected my 3 beloved ones. However, after trying to think, which operas are, by some semi- objective criteria the best, I gave up in desperation, just didn't do the task.


----------



## Highwayman (Jul 16, 2018)

Chronologically:

Wozzeck
The Turn of the Screw 
The Mask of Orpheus
L’Amour de Loin
Written on Skin


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

La Forza del Destino
Lucia di Lammermoor 
Semiramide 
Norma
Don Carlo(s)


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> So how is this different from <What are your 5 favorite operas?>, another thread of yours?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


For the Total Aesthetic Subjectivist there is no difference at all. Personal enjoyment is the sole measure of greatness, making "greatness" a meaningless notion. For those who think that art can be judged (at least in part) by criteria beyond the personal (e.g. technical, historical, philosophical, cultural), the difference between "favorite" and "greatest" is obvious.

Personal example: I think _Le Nozze di Figaro_ is thoroughly masterful and is a great opera, but I enjoy _Der Fliegende Hollander_, an uneven work, more. It's simply more interesting to me, for several reasons. I would never presume to call my 5 favorite operas the greatest operas ever written. One reason is that at a certain level of genius works of art are just too good and too individual - too good at being what they uniquely are - to be meaningfully ranked. In operatic comedy, you may prefer _Falstaff_ and I may prefer _Meistersinger_, but each of these operas has a unique character and set of artistic values which puts it in a class of its own - essentially, a class of one.

The question "What is the greatest?" may have no answer, but it can lead to enjoyable discussion. "What is your favorite?" is a simple and sensible question that can have an answer, but invites no argument.


----------



## Montarsolo (5 mo ago)

Don Giovanni
Die Zauberflote
Norma
Rigoletto
Il barbiere di Sivigilia


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> For the Total Aesthetic Subjectivist there is no difference at all. Personal enjoyment is the sole measure of greatness, making "greatness" a meaningless notion. For those who think that art can be judged (at least in part) by criteria beyond the personal (e.g. technical, historical, philosophical, cultural), the difference between "favorite" and "greatest" is obvious.
> 
> Personal example: I think _Le Nozze di Figaro_ is thoroughly masterful and is a great opera, but I enjoy _Der Fliegende Hollander_, an uneven work, more. It's simply more interesting to me, for several reasons. I would never presume to call my 5 favorite operas the greatest operas ever written. One reason is that at a certain level of genius works of art are just too good and too individual - too good at being what they uniquely are - to be meaningfully ranked. In operatic comedy, you may prefer _Falstaff_ and I may prefer _Meistersinger_, but each of these operas has a unique character and set of artistic values which puts it in a class of its own - essentially, a class of one.
> 
> The question "What is the greatest?" may have no answer, but it can lead to enjoyable discussion. "What is your favorite?" is a simple and sensible question that can have an answer, but invites no argument.


I, for instance, do not remember being really obsesssed by any of the operas by Verdi. It is something personal, about (non)identification with the characters. (It may change any time, with the right opera and right production.) Anyway I recognize Verdi as very listenable with addictive music.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BBSVK said:


> I, for instance, do not remember being really obsesssed by any of the operas by Verdi. It is something personal, about (non)identification with the characters. (It may change any time, with the right opera and right production.) Anyway I recognize Verdi as very listenable with addictive music.


Many of us have experienced either a passion or a blind spot for a particular composer or work, but we should, and often do, understand that this doesn't constitute an objective or comprehensive assessment of excellence or worth. My teenage obsession with Wagner was life-changing in a way not even approached in my experience of other operas, but that doesn't imply - or no longer does - that I think his operas are greater by far than all others. There is more than one metric for greatness, though we focus on those that mean the most to us individually.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> I think _Le Nozze di Figaro_ is thoroughly masterful and is a great opera,


I'm moved to tears by that, just by listening to the music, but think of it this way —
_What if_ the difference between Mozart and his contemporaries is really just a cream bun and a plain bun? _Maybe_ we're just too biased by our preferences that we don't want to admit it ourselves? Maybe we indulge in idolatry of Mozart even _without us realizing it_?
_What if_ Le Nozze di Figaro is really "just one step away" from Cosi fan tutte, which is regarded by many today as Corny Confections, aesthetically (not just idiomatically)? Was Mozart guilty of producing the latter (to make a living, in his place and time)? What if he's just a _glorified crowd-pleaser_?
Could Mozart ever create sounds like Paisiello's "Ma dov'eri tu, stordito"? Just listen to Mozart's own "Non più andrai", "Se a caso madama", or "Se vuol ballare" and think about it.





Also, please think again about


hammeredklavier said:


> Friend Woodduck, I guess this is in some ways related to discussions we had on topics of objectivity/subjectivity (I don't think your views were wrong or uninsightful in any way - just a different way to look at things, from mine). I believe Mozart's traits such as darkness of chromatic harmony and sleekness of vocal writing & instrumental melody, can be objectively found in the other composer (albeit manifested in different ways). What's subjective is whether or not those traits (shared by both composers) are necessarily desirable, or positive, or lead to musical depth. (Various people in history, especially those from Mozart's time and place, actually found Mozart's use of harmony, for instance, undesirable or grating, as I explained before. And lots of people today simply find it _creamy_.) Last week, I was listening to this string quintet in F, (www.youtube.com/watch?v=5a6LX8PSPyI&t=2m25s / www.youtube.com/watch?v=en-ekCM2Lu4&t=55s) and a Mozart work side by side, and although I kept thinking I still _prefer_ the Mozart, it was impossible for me to deny the other composer had all _those traits_, just manifested in different ways. The more I think this way, the more I come to understand views like _"Just cause Mozart has some 'pleasing characteristics' (which aren't even really that 'special' anyway, depending on context), it doesn't mean his farcical operatic expressions aren't farcical. Let's not kid ourselves."_


----------



## Aerobat (Dec 31, 2018)

This is, of course, impossible to answer. From a personal perspective, I might be able to list who I believe to be the five greatest composers but to categorise five single operas is nigh-on impossible. But that's not the answer you're looking for, so I'm going to pick one each from my list of "five greatest composers" and see how that stacks up....

1. Wagner - Parsifal. Quiet simply the most amazing music I know. Others may prefer other works by Wagner, but this one stands out for me for reasons I can't quite define. This stands head and shoulders above all others to my ears.

2 to 5 are 'no particular order'.

2. Mozart - Trying to pick 'one' is hard, but usually Cosi Fan Tutte is the one I'd go for. Yes, the plot is utterly ridiculous, yes it does women no favours(!), but musically it is utterly delightful.

3. Rossini - I have to pick Tancredi for this. Tancredi was written when Rossini was just 20 to 21 years old, and stands out as one of his great achievements.

4. Verdi - as with Mozart, trying to pick one is almost impossible. IMHO, Il Trovatore is his greatest work, if not his most popular. Others will disagree, but there's something about this one that keeps drawing me back to it.

5. Bellini - Here I have to go with La Sonnambula. I regard this is his most complete, consistent work. Many would pick Norma - understandably so - but I find that Norma peaks too early, in that the positioning of Casta Diva relatively early in the Opera leaves me wanting more, yet it never quite delivers. Sonnambula is consistently beautiful from beginning to end, so gets my vote for Bellini. 

Having written this, I realise that I've missed out Handel, and Puccini, and Gounod, and Massenet, and .... and ... and ...

No, picking just five greatest is definitely not possible.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Aerobat said:


> 5. Bellini - Here I have to go with La Sonnambula. I regard this is his most complete, consistent work. Many would pick Norma - understandably so - but I find that Norma peaks too early, in that the positioning of Casta Diva relatively early in the Opera leaves me wanting more, yet it never quite delivers. Sonnambula is consistently beautiful from beginning to end, so gets my vote for Bellini.


Interesting. "Casta diva" is beautiful, but if I listen to it too late in the night (which is my usual time, unfortunately), it puts me to sleep. I am the finale person. "Qual cor tradisti" is my number one, then I need to be patient through "Deh non volerli vittime" , and finally, hurrah, "Padre tu piangi".


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

You're only going to get my 5 favorite operas (maybe 6 if I acknowledge that Mefistofele is obviously in my eyes only)
1. Otello
2. Don Carlo
3. Mefistofele
4. Madama Butterfly
5. Tosca
6. Eugene Onegin
(also ran: Dialogues des Carmelites)


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

As my personal passions go, measured by the length and intensity of obsessions, my most *favourite* operas are:
1. Norma
2. Carmen
3. The Bartered Bride

All of them I believe to be great on objective level, too. I am sure some kind of platonic judge would chose them among the top ones. Top 5 ? Top 20 ? Does it matter ?
But, also, all have their weaknesses. 

Norma - difficult to sing
Carmen - the never ending dilemma whether to use the spokne dialogue or the later added recitatives
The Bartered Bride - a silly plot, and the main strength is in the duets and ensembles, not the individual arias, which is bad for marketing through recitals. But really, the Bartered Bride is hampered most by the Czech language and Czech origin. If it were an Italian opera, it would totally compete with Il Barbiere di Siviglia, in my opinion.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

hammeredklavier said:


> I'm moved to tears by that, just by listening to the music, but think of it this way —
> _What if_ the difference between Mozart and his contemporaries really is just a cream bun and a plain bun?


If so, why was this difference more or less established about 20 years after Mozart's death, certainly 40 years later with Pushkin writing "Mozart and Salieri"? 
Bias has to start somewhere, it cannot just fall from the sky. And a rather plausible explanation is that the bias started with the superiority of Mozart. It might not have been crystal clear in 1790 but pretty much in 1820. I don't dispute that the superiority might have been sometimes a bit exaggerated in the 200 years since then but it's not just fabricated.
And it's not only the music. For opera to "survive" the action and pace have to work as well. The neglect of Cosi fan tutte is evidence for this. I doubt that since the 1950s many would claim that it was musically inferior to e.g. Figaro but the Cosí plot was not suitable in the 19th century, thus its neglect.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> If so, why was this difference more or less established about 20 years after Mozart's death, certainly 40 years later with Pushkin writing "Mozart and Salieri"?
> Bias has to start somewhere, it cannot just fall from the sky. And a rather plausible explanation is that the bias started with the superiority of Mozart.


What is this "superiority" in essence, in what context? It's up to you how seriously you take all those silly cringeworthy sentimental rhetorics said by historical figures (ie. "Mozart is pure divine perfection."). Of course, things (like in sports and other areas, for instance) can attract a lot of fans. Just cause things have a lot of fans, it doesn't mean what the fans say about the things are objective truth. (Remember "argumentum ad populum") This topic is similar to what I discussed in


hammeredklavier said:


> "Being popular today" and "being a father/progenitor in a (bygone) era" are two very different things. Composers who didn't have their music printed or published wouldn't have been widely-known through history. What if I say - what the majority thinks doesn't matter because they haven't spent enough time with the lesser-known composers (ie. listen to the same works multiple times and try various performances/interpretations, over a long period) to make an insightful judgement. And for example, what if I say - I'll only take seriously the opinions of those who can identify the unidentified excerpts of Haydn (M) pieces (which I posted in another thread) regarding Haydn (M)?
> Maybe there was no such thing as the "father of (Classical or whatever) chamber music" (the concept sounds nonsensical to me as "the father of Baroque liturgical music"), it's not something one guy came along and suddenly "invented". Please look back at my post, #412.
> 
> The statement "I like/enjoy [something]" is overused in a vague manner by everyone all the time. We have to look at the what/how/why on case by case basis. The attitude _"I don't really care very much for that era anyway, all I need is Haydn's Happy Humor, and that's it."_ (Maybe many people are thinking and saying that, deep down. "Maybe".) should not be passed as _deep insight_ into matters of what's good and what's not from that era. Just cause many people are into Haydn today, it doesn't mean he actually _invented genres_ in his own time. (I'm not trying to argue Haydn is overrated in any way). It could be subjectively thought that Beecke simply sounds different. One could say he lacks the inventively intellectual wackiness of Haydn, but has greater sadness, graceful serenity-





hammeredklavier said:


> There's nothing wrong with that. Nobody has the right to criticize you for your aesthetic decisions. But have you been to various websites and seen people comment?:
> "He was the only one who wrote in complex methods even after they declined in popularity, the kind of mindset every true artist should have!".
> And there we have the "Bach myth". (By this, I'm not saying Bach is overrated in any way). It's much like the "Mozart myth" you discussed in other threads:
> "His musical designs were so perfect, no one could match him. Everything he wrote in minor keys is so tragic, it is as if he's foretelling his early demise!"
> There's nothing wrong with having admiration or respect for artists, but if the cultism is so strong it clouds our vision, and even entire history books are written based around the myths — it poses a bit of a problem (and I object to Fluteman's support for these things). Don't you think?


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

hammeredklavier said:


> I'm moved to tears by that, just by listening to the music, but think of it this way —
> _What if_ the difference between Mozart and his contemporaries really is just a cream bun and a plain bun?


Is this a euphemism?

N.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> The neglect of Cosi fan tutte is evidence for this.


I still remember you using the historical neglect of Bach's B minor mass as an evidence against its objective greatness.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

hammeredklavier said:


> _What if_ the difference between Mozart and his contemporaries really is just a cream bun and a plain bun? _Maybe_ we're just too biased by our preferences that we don't want to admit it ourselves? Maybe we indulge in idolatry of Mozart even _without us realizing it_?


It felt liberating, what you wrote to me the other day (when I mentioned Jomelli). You wrote, that Mozart was criticised by his contemporaries for something, which is probably hampering me from enjoying his operas more. The emotional barrier created by something organised in that music. After that, I feel free to like him in a more normal way  . It contrasts with the usual narrative, how his music is just absolutely perfect, change just one note, and the whole construction falls apart (seriously ?!!). All the other composers are supposedly nothing, if compared to him, except for Bach, who is an even greater genius, and Mozart might tighten his shoe laces, if he asks nicely.

Also, the Mozart recitatives are often annoying, but it was the feature of that time period.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

hammeredklavier said:


> What is this "superiority", in essence, in what context?


You can sell out an opera house with Nozze, Don Giovanni or Magic Flute, but Il matrimonio segreto, Gazzaniga's Don Giovanni or von Winter's Das Labyrinth oddly don't have the same draw.

That's not to say that it's as simple as greatness = popularity, but anyone putting forward the bold opinion that Mozart is overrated needs to back that up with some robust reasoning.

N.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Simply impossible.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

^^What he said


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> _*What if*_ the difference between Mozart and his contemporaries is actually just a cream bun and a plain bun?


I think it's more like the difference between Formosa Oolong and Earl Gray. Or partly cloudy and partly sunny. Or a great Dane and a pretty darned good Dane.



> _*Maybe*_ we're just too biased by our preferences that we don't want to admit it ourselves? *Maybe* we indulge in idolatry of Mozart even _without us realizing it_?


Maybe Mozart wrote greater operas than his contemporaries, and maybe that's why his are performed much more often than theirs.



> *Could* Mozart ever create sounds like Paisiello's "Ma dov'eri tu, stordito"? Just listen to Mozart's own "Non più andrai", "Se a caso madama", or "Se vuol ballare" and think about it.


Why not? He didn't choose to, so the question is unanswerable.



> Also, please think again about


What exactly am I to think about, and why would I want to?


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> Maybe Mozart wrote greater operas than his contemporaries, and maybe that's why his are performed much more often than theirs.


Would the same reasoning apply to the canons of Bach's musical offering (for example) vs. Pachelbel's canon in D?


hammeredklavier said:


> One could ask-
> "Upon seeing the phenomenon of hundreds of millions of people (even without the knowledge of how a canon works) going onto youtube to listen to it (something written for the sensibilities of an age 350 years of the past), -aren't you in AWE, of the power of Western classical music?"


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

A certain member in the past made a good point by posting the following in another thread (something for us to think about):
"All of the factors contributing to greatness are interrelated and dependent on each other. For example, one factor mentioned above is the tradition of received wisdom: belief in A's greatness has been passed down from generation to generation, reinforced by music textbooks and concert performances and internet forums, while belief in B's greatness has not. Another factor mentioned above is the test of time: A seems greater than B because the former's music has survived till today while the latter's has not. But these two factors are mutually reinforcing: if music textbooks have chapters on A but not B, then of course the former is going to have a leg up on the latter when it comes to the test of time. Conversely, if A's music is still performed today while B's is not, then of course music textbooks are going to have chapters on the former but not the latter. Likewise, another factor that has been mentioned is influence: A has demonstrably had a lasting influence on later composers, even today, while B has not. This is also inherently connected to the above factors: since A appears in textbooks and is more widely performed than B, then of course he is going to have a greater influence on later composers than B will.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> What exactly am I to think about, and why would I want to?


Ok. Let's think of it this way; why would Paisiello be an objectively lesser opera composer (not just a different one) than Mozart? What did he "lack"? "_Divine_ Inspiration for _Divine_ Perfection"?



Woodduck said:


> Why not? He didn't choose to, so the question is unanswerable.


Paisiello wasn't trying to be like Mozart either. So there- _different aesthetic goals_


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> Would the same reasoning apply to the canons of Bach's musical offering (for example) vs. Pachelbel's canon in D?


I don't know why you want to resurrect here the tiresome debates about who's greater than whom, or whether greatness is real or discernible. But if you must pose examples, at least make them reasonable. There are numerous reasons why music attains popularity or doesn't, intrinsic quality being only one of them. But comparing utterly dissimilar pieces because they're both called "canon" isn't likely to get us anywhere near those reasons. And even if it did, would you expect a complete verbal explanation of why, and in what way, one work is superior to another? I, for one, am not capable of describing where the boundary lies between blue and green, or telling you why Beethoven was right not to repeat the opening chord of his "Eroica" two more times before continuing with the movement. You either discern these things or you don't. I should mention, though, that Leonard Bernstein did a remarkable job of explaining why Mozart didn't repeat the opening vamp figure of his G-minor Symphony two more times, as most composers would probably have done. But Bernstein possessed exceptional musical and verbal intelligence.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

BBSVK said:


> You wrote, that Mozart was criticised by his contemporaries for something


"At the beginning of the nineteenth century, before Berlioz's time, some influential critics - for instance, Julien-Louis Geoffroy - rejected Mozart as a foreigner, considering his music 'scholastic', stressing *his use of harmony over melody, and the dominance of the orchestra over singing in the operas - all these were considered negative features of 'Germanic' music.*" -Benjamin Perl


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> I should mention, though, that Leonard Bernstein did a remarkable job of explaining why Mozart didn't repeat the opening vamp figure of his G-minor Symphony two more times, as most composers would probably have done. But Bernstein possessed exceptional musical and verbal intelligence.


That could also be a subjective thing in a lot of cases (eg. EdwardBast's view on Bruckner).


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

---------------------------------------


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> I don't know why you want to resurrect here the tiresome debates about who's greater than whom, or whether greatness is real or discernible.


Friend Woodduck, I have/had no intention of doing it, I was just a bit troubled by your post; "... The question "What is the greatest?" may have no answer, but it can lead to enjoyable discussion. "What is your favorite?" is a simple and sensible question that can have an answer, but invites no argument. ..." 
I still respect your views, and I sympathize with your wish not to turn this into another subjectivity vs objectivity thread.


----------



## damianjb1 (Jan 1, 2016)

My five greatest Opera's are:

Orpheus and Eurydice - Gluck
Don Giovanni - Mozart
Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg - Wagner
Aida - Verdi
Peter Grimes - Britten


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I'm always amused when the line of discussion is favorite vs. greatest. Never in the history of TC has a member proven that one musical work is greater than another. The discussion may be interesting but goes nowhere.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

damianjb1 said:


> My five greatest Opera's are:
> 
> Orpheus and Eurydice - Gluck
> Don Giovanni - Mozart
> ...


I've considered putting Aida on my list of greats. But I gave up and made a list of the most loved ones, where it doesn't belong. I miss something in the plot to identify myself with someone in that opera, so it is not the tsunami I expect from the operatic experience. However, it somehow miracuously avoids being ear-wormy, while staying melodic. At least for me. I can safely listen to it after being tired from other music.


----------



## AlexD (Nov 6, 2011)

The Conte said:


> Is this a euphemism?
> 
> N.


Sometimes a bun is just a bun.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

The only thing I’m sure of in this thread is that Michael Haydn is not greater than Joseph Haydn. I think posterity has borne that out!. Although the reverse is occasionally ‘hammered’ into us! 😂


----------



## OffPitchNeb (Jun 6, 2016)

Le Nozze di Figaro
Der Ring des Nibelungen
Parsifal
Otello
Pelléas et Mélisande


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Barbebleu said:


> I’m sure that Michael Haydn is not greater than Joseph Haydn. I think posterity has borne that out!





hammeredklavier said:


> With all due respect, there's nothing wrong with that of course, but how can we simply assume, for instance, 'Mozart has greater objective worth than Haydn (M)' without giving both equal amounts of chance? (See "I didn't see the merits of X's music...) What if Haydn's music isn't widely known today because he didn't have his music printed? How well do we know his music to pass judgement objectively?-
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

--------------------------------------


----------



## damianjb1 (Jan 1, 2016)

BBSVK said:


> I've considered putting Aida on my list of greats. But I gave up and made a list of the most loved ones, where it doesn't belong. I miss something in the plot to identify myself with someone in that opera, so it is not the tsunami I expect from the operatic experience. However, it somehow miracuously avoids being ear-wormy, while staying melodic. At least for me. I can safely listen to it after being tired from other music.


It's a hard choice with Verdi. You can make a case that Don Carlos, Aida, Otello or even Falstaff is his greatest Opera. For me, Aida is a perfect Opera. There's not a note that needs to be cut, it's concise and the music is incredible. 
In regards to the other Verdi Opera's I mentioned-
Don Carlos: too many versions for this to be top of the list
Otello: Iago is too much of a cartoon villain for me
Falstaff - Tragedy is 'greater' than comedy


----------



## justekaia (Jan 2, 2022)

A List
Tristan and Isolde
Parsifal
Don Giovanni
La Traviata
Innocence
B List
Norma 
Butterfly
Pelleas et Melisande
The Passenger
Heart Chamber


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Impossible to pick a top 5, but here's a few that I find particularly compelling for various reasons. I do particularly enjoy contemporary and 20th century opera, as you can see from this list: 

Pelleas et Melisande (Claude Debussy)
L'enfant et les sortilèges (Maurice Ravel)
Don Giovanni (W. A. Mozart)
Boris Godunov (Modest Mussorgsky)
L'Amour de Loin (Kaija Saariaho)
Penthesilea (Pascal Dusapin)
Die Soldaten (Bernd Alois Zimmermann)
Where the Wild Things Are (Oliver Knussen)
Written on Skin (George Benjamin)
Elektra (Richard Strauss)
Wozzeck (Alban Berg)
Il Prigioniero (Luigi Dallapiccola)
Saint François d'Assise (Olivier Messiaen)
Jenůfa (Leoš Janáček)
Death in Venice (Benjamin Britten)


----------



## Highwayman (Jul 16, 2018)

composingmusic said:


> Penthesilea (Pascal Dusapin)


Othmar Schoeck`s own _Penthesilea_ isn`t half bad either.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

La Sonnambula (Bellini)
Martha (Flotow)
L'Amico Fritz (Mascagni)
Can I pick the whole Wagner Ring?
Can I pick Donizetti's Three Queens?

Beyond that are Fidelio, the Flying Dutchman, and many many others.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Aerobat said:


> 5. Bellini - Here I have to go with La Sonnambula. I regard this is his most complete, consistent work. Many would pick Norma - understandably so - but I find that Norma peaks too early, in that the positioning of Casta Diva relatively early in the Opera leaves me wanting more, yet it never quite delivers. Sonnambula is consistently beautiful from beginning to end, so gets my vote for Bellini.


I am pleased to see some love for La Sonnambula!


----------



## OffPitchNeb (Jun 6, 2016)

composingmusic said:


> Impossible to pick a top 5, but here's a few that I find particularly compelling for various reasons. I do particularly enjoy contemporary and 20th century opera, as you can see from this list:
> 
> Pelleas et Melisande (Claude Debussy)
> L'enfant et les sortilèges (Maurice Ravel)
> ...


You have very good taste, my friend!


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

OffPitchNeb said:


> You have very good taste, my friend!


Why thank you! As I said, I'm particularly a fan of contemporary opera, but I enjoy older repertoire too.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

BBSVK said:


> Actually, I was once asked to list 3 operas I love most versus 3 operas I think are the best. I quickly selected my 3 beloved ones. However, after trying to think, which operas are, by some semi- objective criteria the best, I gave up in desperation, just didn't do the task.


it's actually impossible.

We would need to invent the best-o-meter, there are no 'objective' criteria at all.

My favorites as of October 2022:

Norma
La traviata
Die Tote Stadt
Lulu
Dialogues des carmélites



This is an ever-changing list, of course.


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith (Mar 25, 2016)

hammeredklavier said:


> "At the beginning of the nineteenth century, before Berlioz's time, some influential critics - for instance, Julien-Louis Geoffroy - rejected Mozart as a foreigner, considering his music 'scholastic', stressing *his use of harmony over melody, and the dominance of the orchestra over singing in the operas - all these were considered negative features of 'Germanic' music.*" -Benjamin Perl


In that, Geoffroy probably echoed Grétry, who maintained that the orchestra’s role was to support the song, develop it, explain it sometimes, but always in second place. He found Mozart's music incomprehensible. “Mozart puts the statue in the orchestra, and the pedestal onstage,” he famously complained. In this, Fétis thought, he was no more advanced than the public of his day. (The opéra-comique audiences were notoriously unsophisticated; well into the 1830s, critics complained of their passion for undemanding froth.)


----------



## ScottK (Dec 23, 2021)

I didn’t get a chance to read through lots of responses but with all the ink I saw above I have no doubt a lot of time was spent with the main question I have, Even if it was phrased differently again and again… How do you do this without objective criteria? That could be a Thread Unto itself! So stating that... I have no idea how to choose the Five greatest operas.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

ScottK said:


> I didn’t get a chance to read through lots of responses but with all the ink I saw above I have no doubt a lot of time was spent with the main question I have, Even if it was phrased differently again and again… How do you do this without objective criteria? That could be a Thread Unto itself! So stating that... I have no idea how to choose the Five greatest operas.


Don't worry. The Five Greatest Operas don't exist. It's just a koan.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

ScottK said:


> I didn’t get a chance to read through lots of responses but with all the ink I saw above I have no doubt a lot of time was spent with the main question I have, Even if it was phrased differently again and again… How do you do this without objective criteria? That could be a Thread Unto itself! So stating that... I have no idea how to choose the Five greatest operas.


Which 5 operas are the God's favourite ? :-D


----------



## Agamenon (Apr 22, 2019)

Woodduck said:


> For the Total Aesthetic Subjectivist there is no difference at all. Personal enjoyment is the sole measure of greatness, making "greatness" a meaningless notion. For those who think that art can be judged (at least in part) by criteria beyond the personal (e.g. technical, historical, philosophical, cultural), the difference between "favorite" and "greatest" is obvious.
> 
> Personal example: I think _Le Nozze di Figaro_ is thoroughly masterful and is a great opera, but I enjoy _Der Fliegende Hollander_, an uneven work, more. It's simply more interesting to me, for several reasons. I would never presume to call my 5 favorite operas the greatest operas ever written. One reason is that at a certain level of genius works of art are just too good and too individual - too good at being what they uniquely are - to be meaningfully ranked. In operatic comedy, you may prefer _Falstaff_ and I may prefer _Meistersinger_, but each of these operas has a unique character and set of artistic values which puts it in a class of its own - essentially, a class of one.
> 
> The question "What is the greatest?" may have no answer, but it can lead to enjoyable discussion. "What is your favorite?" is a simple and sensible question that can have an answer, but invites no argument.


Excellent.

I do no like Figaro, Falstaff, Tosca, but in musical terms ( technical, influence, craftsmanship, orchestration,etc,etc), these 3 operas are MASTERPIECES. I recognize the sunlight!

5 Greatest operas? 

Le Nozze di Figaro.
Parsifal.
Falstaff.
Gotterdammerung
Salome.


----------



## Agamenon (Apr 22, 2019)

Woodduck said:


> I think it's more like the difference between Formosa Oolong and Earl Gray. Or partly cloudy and partly sunny. Or a great Dane and a pretty darned good Dane.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You said: _*Maybe Mozart wrote greater operas than his contemporaries....*_

How do you know their contemporaries operas are (or not are) stunning masterpieces ? Maybe Mozart is a bad bad composer, a pale opera composer.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Agamenon said:


> You said: _*Maybe Mozart wrote greater operas than his contemporaries....*_
> 
> How do you know their contemporaries operas are (or not are) stunning masterpieces ? Maybe Mozart is a bad bad composer, a pale opera composer.


Maybe maybe maybe maybe maybe...

Where did I claim to know anything?


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Just 5? You could make a case for any of these, and probably others too:

L'incoronazione di Poppea
Giulio Cesare
Le Nozze di Figaro
Don Giovanni
Medea
Fidelio
Der Freischütz
William Tell
Norma
La Traviata
Les Troyens
Tristan und Isolde
Der Meistersinger von Nürnberg
Die Walküre
Götterdämmerung
Carmen
Parsifal
Otello
Flastaff
Tosca
Salome
Wozzeck
Peter Grimes
L'Amour de Loin
Written on Skin


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Op.123 said:


> Just 5? You could make a case for any of these, and probably others too:
> 
> L'incoronazione di Poppea
> Giulio Cesare
> ...


Truly some excellent selections here! And I agree, choosing just five is impossible. 
On the note of L'Amour de Loin, Saariaho's more recent opera Innocence is coming to London in the spring, which is very exciting!


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

Op.123 said:


> Just 5? You could make a case for any of these, and probably others too:
> 
> L'incoronazione di Poppea
> Giulio Cesare
> ...


It's one of the most impressive selections.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Agamenon said:


> not stunning


By whose criteria?


hammeredklavier said:


> Could Mozart ever create sounds like Paisiello's "Ma dov'eri tu, stordito"? Just listen to Mozart's own "Non più andrai", "Se a caso madama", or "Se vuol ballare" and think about it.





hammeredklavier said:


> I find none of such devices in Reichardt's works from Berlin. Also, there are no seccos; only accompagnatos or spoken speech in his. One of them is actually 'through-composed', as I discussed in the thread <Mozart and through-composition>.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Agamenon said:


> influence


*The worst non-argument ever.*


hammeredklavier said:


> The interpretation of each composer's impact can be subjective. For example, the idea to use voices in symphonies (not that it's a bad thing objectively)- if you don't think the subsequent composers' decision to use voices in symphonies was a very good idea, you'll not value the influence of the pioneer highly. Every innovation was a Pandora's box that eventually led to modernism, which some people on the forum always express disapproval for.


----------



## Doublestring (Sep 3, 2014)

Monteverdi - L'Orfeo
Mozart - Don Giovanni
Wagner - Tristan und Isolde
Puccini - Madame Butterfly
Berg - Wozzeck


----------



## Monsalvat (11 mo ago)

Doublestring said:


> Monteverdi - L'Orfeo
> Mozart - Don Giovanni
> Wagner - Tristan und Isolde
> Puccini - Madame Butterfly
> Berg - Wozzeck


Why do you choose _Butterfly_ among the Puccini operas?


----------



## Dick Johnson (Apr 14, 2020)

Picking just 5 is impossible and changes day to day. 
Today's top 5:
Guillaume Tell - Rossini
Meistersinger - Wagner
Iphegenie en Tauride - Gluck
I Vespri Siciliani - Verdi
Alessandro - Handel


----------



## dko22 (Jun 22, 2021)

1. Jenufa
2. The Cunning Little Vixen
3. Kata Kabanova
4. Lady Macbeth
5. The Passenger (Weinberg)


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

dko22 said:


> 1. Jenufa
> 2. The Cunning Little Vixen
> 3. Kata Kabanova
> 4. Lady Macbeth
> 5. The Passenger (Weinberg)


A fan of Janáček, I see!


----------



## dko22 (Jun 22, 2021)

one could say that 

I have to say that in general I have little time for opera written before the 20th century, either because of ludicrous plots or the many artificial conventions of the form. So I may be even less able to "objectively" say which are really the five greatest operas than most. My favourites are overwhelmingly (though not exclusively) by Slavonic composers.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

BBSVK said:


> Which 5 operas are the God's favourite ? :-D


That is another thread and could be quite interesting, but also could devolve into religious discussion and a shut down thread, but since I can't help myself, I will suggest Poulenc's Dialogues of the Carmelites might make His list.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

5 is impossible, but here goes.....

1. Der Ring Des Nibelungen - Wagner
2. Parsifal - Wagner
3. Death in Venice - Britten
3. Don Carlo - Verdi
4. Wozzeck - Berg
5. The Mask Of Orpheus - Birtwistle

Phew! Just made it - didn't think I could keep it down to just 5!


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

HenryPenfold said:


> 5 is impossible, but here goes.....
> 
> 1. Der Ring Des Nibelungen - Wagner
> 2. Parsifal - Wagner
> ...


----------



## Doublestring (Sep 3, 2014)

Monsalvat said:


> Why do you choose _Butterfly_ among the Puccini operas?


It was always my favorite story, with the betrayal, the tragic longing and the ritual ending. _Un Bel Dì Vedremo_ is one of the greatest soprono arias. Following the score makes you realize the quality of Puccini's refined orchestration too. It's always subtle and poetic; never bombastic.


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

dko22 said:


> one could say that
> 
> I have to say that in general I have little time for opera written before the 20th century, either because of ludicrous plots or the many artificial conventions of the form. So I may be even less able to "objectively" say which are really the five greatest operas than most. My favourites are overwhelmingly (though not exclusively) by Slavonic composers.


I think Janáček has some great operas! Imo he’s a great composer in general. 

A more contemporary Czech figure who writes really well for voice, imo, is Ondřej Adámek.


----------



## dko22 (Jun 22, 2021)

Janáček has written great choral, piano and chamber music. The only area in which he is little represented is symphonic music as virtually everything he's done is programmatic in some way. I'll check out Adámek -- know little more than the name.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

---------------------------------------


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> (Sorry, I know it's off-topic, but I feel I posted the wrong excerpt in Post#40.)
> The _seamless_ lead-in to the recapitulation @6:47-


This demonstrates nothing, like most of your tendentious posts. You would do well to address the actual subjects of the threads you invade with your obsessive advocacy of this composer. Start a Michael Haydn thread somewhere besides the opera forum, keep it running as long as you can find people interested in it, and seek some balance in your life.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

oyy vay ... waaaay too soon


----------



## skealey99 (4 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> The question "What is the greatest?" may have no answer, but it can lead to enjoyable discussion. "What is your favorite?" is a simple and sensible question that can have an answer, but invites no argument.


 I like that alot !!!


----------



## skealey99 (4 mo ago)

I can't yet, think of criteria. 

For singers I have thought of criteria...not saying they're wonderful or insightful or exhaustive but they're the best I've come up with..... can it be intelligently asserted that the singer has a combination of critical and popular acclaim AND can an argument be made that the singer has identifiable roles in which many have found them memorable.

Now I only include that here to make the point that in certain circumstances criteria can be arrived at. I've skipped through this thread so forgive me if this has been done earlier......what might be the criteria for greatness in the composing of an opera?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Doublestring said:


> It was always my favorite story, with the betrayal, the tragic longing and the ritual ending. _Un Bel Dì Vedremo_ is one of the greatest soprono arias. Following the score makes you realize the quality of Puccini's refined orchestration too. It's always subtle and poetic; never bombastic.


Forced to choose, I too would pick _Butterfly_ as Puccini's greatest opera, not only for its musical beauties but for the richly detailed and sympathetic portrayal of Cio Cio San. In her I think Puccini created the highest expression of his most essential secret self, the vulnerable inner feminine embodied in the suffering young women who haunt his operas from Manon to Liu.


----------

