# Talk Classical's Most Recommended Composers



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

This list was automatically generated from appearances on The Talk Classical Community's Favorite and Most Highly Works. Works were assigned a score of 1/n where n is the tier of the work. The total points for each composer were then summed and ranked.


*Rank**Name**Born*​*Died*​*Nationality*1Ludwig van Beethoven17701827Germany2Johann Sebastian Bach16851750Germany3Johannes Brahms18331897Germany4Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart17561791Austria5Franz Schubert17971828Austria6Gustav Mahler18601911Austria7Joseph Haydn17321809Austria8Dmitri Shostakovich19061975Russian Federation9Antonín Dvořák18411904Czech Republic10Claude Debussy18621918France11Robert Schumann18101856Germany12Richard Wagner18131883Germany13Sergei Prokofiev18911953Russian Federation14Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky18401893Russian Federation15Felix Mendelssohn18091847Germany16Jean Sibelius18651957Finland17Maurice Ravel18751937France18Igor Stravinsky18821971Russian Federation19Béla Bartók18811945Hungary20Gabriel Fauré18451924France21Sergei Rachmaninoff18731943Russian Federation22Frédéric Chopin18101849Poland23Richard Strauss18641949Germany24Ralph Vaughan Williams18721958United Kingdom25George Frideric Handel16851759Germany26Olivier Messiaen19081992France27Arnold Schoenberg18741951Austria28Franz Liszt18111886Hungary29Samuel Barber19101981United States30Edward Elgar18571934United Kingdom31Camille Saint-Saëns18351921France32György Ligeti19232006Hungary33Anton Bruckner18241896Austria34Hector Berlioz18031869France35Bohuslav Martinů18901959Czech Republic36Antonio Vivaldi16781741Italy37Benjamin Britten19131976United Kingdom38Alfred Schnittke19341998Germany39Edvard Grieg18431907Norway40Leoš Janáček18541928Czech Republic41Paul Hindemith18951963Germany42Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov18441908Russian Federation43Carl Nielsen18651931Denmark44Aaron Copland19001990United States45Heitor Villa-Lobos18871959Brazil46George Enescu18811955Romania47Claudio Monteverdi15671643Italy48Giuseppe Verdi18131901Italy49Alexander Scriabin18721915Russian Federation50Francis Poulenc18991963France51Modest Mussorgsky18391881Russian Federation52César Franck18221890Belgium53Charles Ives18741954United States54John Cage19121992United States55Alban Berg18851935Austria56John Adams1947presentUnited States57Josquin des Prez14501521France58Max Bruch18381920Germany59Andrew Carter1939presentUnited Kingdom60Gustav Holst18741934United Kingdom61Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina15251594Italy62Anton Webern18831945Austria63Arvo Pärt1935presentEstonia64George Gershwin18981937United States65Gerald Finzi19011956United Kingdom66Krzysztof Penderecki1933presentPoland67Philip Glass1937presentUnited States68Toru Takemitsu19301996Japan69Iannis Xenakis19222001Greece70Karlheinz Stockhausen19282007Germany71Ottorino Respighi18791936Italy72Johann Nepomuk Hummel17781837Austria73Pierre Boulez19252016France74Ernest Chausson18551899France75Alexander Glazunov18651936Russian Federation76Ernest Bloch18801959United States77Karol Szymanowski18821937Poland78Witold Lutosławski19131994Poland79Henry Purcell16591695United Kingdom80Sofia Gubaidulina1931presentRussian Federation81Einojuhani Rautavaara19282016Finland82Alexander Borodin18331887Russian Federation83Max Reger18731916Germany84Jean-Philippe Rameau16831764France85Arthur Honegger18921955Switzerland86Frederick Delius18621934United Kingdom87Kaija Saariaho1952presentFinland88Arnold Bax18831953United Kingdom89Luigi Nono19241990Italy90Giacomo Puccini18581924Italy91Kurt Atterberg18871974Sweden92Zoltán Kodály18821967Hungary93Bedřich Smetana18241884Czech Republic94Morton Feldman19261987United States95Luciano Berio19252003Italy96Thomas Tallis15051585United Kingdom97Domenico Scarlatti16851757Italy98Georges Bizet18381875France99Henri Dutilleux19162013France100Steve Reich1936presentUnited States


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

101Guillaume Du Fay14001474Belgium102Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber16441704Czech Republic103Johannes Ockeghem14101497Belgium104Joachim Raff18221882Switzerland105William Walton19021983United Kingdom106Dieterich Buxtehude16371707Denmark107Leonard Bernstein19181990United States108George Crumb1929presentUnited States109Carl Maria von Weber17861826Germany110Orlande de Lassus15321594Belgium111Alexander von Zemlinsky18711942Austria112Marc-Antoine Charpentier16431704France113François Couperin16681733France114Josef Suk18741935Czech Republic115Nikolai Medtner18801951United Kingdom116Luigi Boccherini17431805Italy117Joaquín Rodrigo19011999Spain118Erik Satie18661925France119Allan Pettersson19111980Sweden120Alberto Ginastera19161983Argentina121Carlo Gesualdo15661613Italy122Wilhelm Stenhammar18711927Sweden123Sergei Taneyev18561915Russian Federation124John Dowland15631626United Kingdom125Wolfgang Rihm1952presentGermany126Edgard Varèse18831965France127Guillaume de Machaut13001377France128Unsuk Chin1961presentKorea, Republic of129Alan Hovhaness19112000Armenia130Henryk Górecki19332010Poland131Luigi Cherubini17601842Italy132Reinhold Glière18751956Ukraine133William Alwyn19051985United Kingdom134Milton Babbitt19162011United States135Hans Abrahamsen1952presentDenmark136Nikolai Myaskovsky18811950Russian Federation137Christoph Willibald Gluck17141787Germany138Georg Friedrich Haas1953presentAustria139Jan Dismas Zelenka16791745Czech Republic140Isaac Albéniz18601909Spain141Anton Arensky18611906Russian Federation142György Kurtág1926presentHungary143Louis Vierne18701937France144Édouard Lalo18231892France145Ernest John Moeran18941950United Kingdom146Tomás Luis de Victoria15481611Spain147Johann Strauss II18251899Austria148Georg Philipp Telemann16811767Germany149Mikhail Glinka18041857Russian Federation150Joaquín Turina18821949Spain151Ferruccio Busoni18661924Italy152Mily Balakirev18371910Russian Federation153Albéric Magnard18651914France154Louis Spohr17841859Germany155Louise Farrenc18041875France156Terry Riley1935presentUnited States157Aram Khachaturian19031978Russian Federation158Arcangelo Corelli16531713Italy159William Byrd15391623United Kingdom160Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach17141788Germany161Manuel de Falla18761946Spain162Albert Roussel18691937France163Osvaldo Golijov1960presentArgentina164Heinrich Schütz15851672Germany165Darius Milhaud18921974France166Beat Furrer1954presentAustria167Harrison Birtwistle1934presentUnited Kingdom168Amy Beach18671944United States169Enrique Granados18671916Spain170Thomas Adès1971presentUnited Kingdom171Leo Ornstein18952002United States172Tristan Murail1947presentFrance173Giovanni Gabrieli15541612Italy174Adrian Willaert14901562Netherlands175Hans Werner Henze19262012Germany176William Schuman19101992United States177Brian Ferneyhough19431987United Kingdom178Paul Dukas18651935France179Gaetano Donizetti17971848Italy180Josef Rheinberger18391901Germany181Hildegard of Bingen10981179Germany182Charles-Valentin Alkan18131888France183Charles Gounod18181893France184Gérard Grisey19461998France185Hugo Alfvén18721960Sweden186Gioachino Rossini17921868Italy187Emmanuel Chabrier18411894France188Hugo Wolf18601903Austria189Niccolò Paganini17821840Italy190Geirr Tveitt19081981Norway191Michael Nyman1944presentUnited Kingdom192Erich Wolfgang Korngold18971957Austria193Michael Tippett19051998United Kingdom194Gilbert and Sullivan18421900United Kingdom195Vincenzo Bellini18011835Italy196Anton Reicha17701836Czech Republic197Granville Bantock18681946United Kingdom198Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji18921988United Kingdom199Giacomo Meyerbeer17911864Germany200Jacques Offenbach18191880Germany


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I'm actually rather impressed that you calculated all the composers "scores" from that list. You could have assumed that the Ring counts as 4 works all in the 2nd tier. Then Wagner would be 5th.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

mmsbls said:


> I'm actually rather impressed that you calculated all the composers "scores" from that list. You could have assumed that the Ring counts as 4 works all in the 2nd tier. Then Wagner would be 5th.


It's already done on an exponential scale, giving a huge bonus to works in the top tiers. It would take 10 works at the 10th tier to equal work one at the 1st tier, and 100 works at the 100th tier to equal one work at the 1st tier. This is so composers with a small volume of masterpiece-quality works (ie. Wagner, Mahler) have a chance against composers who wrote hundreds of works of middling quality.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

We could also do a linear scale (ie, top tier work is worth 100 points, second tier is 99 points, third 98 points, so on...) the ranking would look somewhat different:


*Rank**Composer**Points*​1Beethoven47652Bach39303Mozart38654Brahms36095Schubert28756Haydn28557Shostakovich21008Schumann19399Debussy174610Prokofiev170811Dvořák165312Tchaikovsky151213Ravel141314Mendelssohn139615Bartók127216Sibelius126817Fauré120618Stravinsky116519Chopin116320Mahler113621Vaughan Williams113222Rachmaninoff105223Schoenberg102124Ligeti91625Messiaen90426Liszt90127Strauss90028Barber84929Handel83930Elgar81331Martinů71032Saint-Saëns70133Berlioz63634Britten62535Schnittke62036Nielsen60437Bruckner59338Janáček57039Wagner56440Hindemith56441Scriabin53642Grieg52843Poulenc52544Vivaldi51845Copland47946Ives46947Webern46548Franck45949Verdi45750Dohnányi455


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Here is the dataset in tabulated form for anybody wishing to explore this:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EMK21tI2tcn6OJe6elEMZDge5WIQZfhaaTVVocJjoxg/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

I like Partita's idea (see the other thread) for a geometric decline in value per work (w.r.t tier in TC's list) better than the "1/n" system used in the OP (and certainly better than the linear system).

Not sure about the decline rate... 10% per tier maybe? 20%?


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> I like Partita's idea (see the other thread) for a geometric decline in value per work (w.r.t tier in TC's list) better than the "1/n" system used in the OP (and certainly better than the linear system).
> 
> Not sure about the decline rate... 10% per tier maybe? 20%?


Seems reasonable. At 10% decline (each successive tier is worth 90% of the one higher than it) here is what you get... Brahms higher than Bach?



*Rank**Composer* *Score*1Beethoven 1,135.932Brahms 1,080.403Bach 950.534Mozart 786.775Schubert 565.276Mahler 462.937Shostakovich 330.038Dvořák 301.959Debussy 268.5310Sibelius 256.6111Tchaikovsky 233.7912Ravel 229.7213Mendelssohn 223.8314Haydn 216.8815Wagner 203.7616Schumann 201.5617Prokofiev 199.9218Fauré 168.0719Stravinsky 164.7220Bartók 162.3221Rachmaninoff 144.7822Chopin 121.5623Strauss 102.1724Bruckner 92.4725Saint-Saëns 79.1726Barber 72.1227Schoenberg 70.7628Berlioz 70.5829Messiaen 69.7730Mussorgsky 69.2731Handel 68.5232Grieg 66.0233Liszt 64.3534Rimsky-Korsakov 61.9935Elgar 61.4836Vivaldi 55.5537Vaughan Williams 50.7038Gershwin 47.8139Berg 44.3940Janáček 43.5341Bruch 42.6342Tallis 41.0543Monteverdi 39.7544Nielsen 38.6745Schnittke 37.9946Ligeti 34.4047Copland 34.3448Holst 33.1849Borodin 32.9150Verdi 31.7351Bizet 31.1952Josquin 30.9653Gesualdo 30.1954Smetana 29.5555Palestrina 28.5456Franck 26.4657Kodály 25.1458Rodrigo 24.9659Puccini 23.6260Scriabin 22.6261Dohnányi 22.3962Biber 21.5663Hindemith 21.3564Webern 20.7865Ives 19.9666Martinů 19.1167Takemitsu 17.6368Chausson 17.4169Alwyn 16.9670Respighi 16.8771Lalo 16.8572Britten 16.4773Ockeghem 15.8974Finzi 15.7875Bloch 15.6176Machaut 15.1177Cage 15.0578Crumb 13.8479Hummel 13.2880Honegger 12.2981Feldman 12.2882Górecki 11.3183Magnard 11.2284Zemlinsky 10.3985Abrahamsen 10.3586Poulenc 10.3487Villa-Lobos 10.1488Albéniz 9.9889Stockhausen 9.8690Purcell 9.6091Szymanowski 9.3992Corelli 9.3693Pärt 9.3594Vasks 9.2695Carter 9.0596Dowland 8.9597Haas 8.9498Glazunov 8.7899Rameau 8.77100Buxtehude 8.74


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

At 20% decline rate:


*Rank**Composer** Score*1Beethoven 504.212Brahms 495.923Bach 464.544Mozart 303.105Mahler 229.466Schubert 209.187Wagner 146.558Dvořák 121.389Sibelius 81.5410Stravinsky 76.2111Shostakovich 73.5412Debussy 67.7113Tchaikovsky 61.5214Mendelssohn 58.4015Ravel 49.4516Rachmaninoff 44.5717Prokofiev 42.8118Fauré 37.4019Bartók 36.8320Mussorgsky 33.2621Schumann 30.5122Haydn 28.7423Berlioz 21.8124Bruckner 17.7025Vivaldi 17.2726Strauss 16.0327Saint-Saëns 15.8828Rimsky-Korsakov 15.0929Liszt 13.9530Chopin 13.8431Tallis 13.4532Grieg 11.9333Messiaen 11.4734Barber 11.4035Handel 11.1436Gershwin 9.4737Berg 8.9538Bruch 8.9039Elgar 8.6740Holst 8.5941Schoenberg 7.0342Borodin 6.9343Bizet 5.6044Palestrina 5.5145Monteverdi 5.2546Copland 4.6647Janáček 4.6548Kodály 4.4149Gesualdo 3.6950Smetana 3.3251Nielsen 3.2952Josquin 2.7653Schnittke 2.7454Rodrigo 2.7255Verdi 2.5656Biber 2.3057Alwyn 2.2558Lalo 2.2559Vaughan Williams 2.0460Franck 1.7861Puccini 1.6362Takemitsu 1.4863Machaut 1.4564Ligeti 1.0965Hindemith 1.0166Dohnányi 1.0067Respighi 0.9968Crumb 0.9669Magnard 0.9270Górecki 0.9271Ives 0.8172Scriabin 0.6873Ockeghem 0.6574Chausson 0.6375Corelli 0.5976Cage 0.5777Webern 0.5278Bloch 0.5179Albéniz 0.4980Abrahamsen 0.4981Zemlinsky 0.4982Canteloube 0.4783Hildegard 0.3984Dowland 0.3885Szymanowski 0.3886Honegger 0.3887Martinů 0.3588Feldman 0.3589Britten 0.3490Haas 0.3391Finzi 0.3292Stockhausen 0.3293Buxtehude 0.3194Dufay 0.3195Duruflé 0.3096Vasks 0.2997Villa-Lobos 0.2698Pärt 0.2699Satie 0.26100Hummel 0.25


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Note that the geometric decline is fairer to works above tier 12, but below that, it becomes harsher than 1/n. It reduces the lower tier works to practically worthless.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Any poll that does not place the big 3 in the top 3 slots is at fault.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

PlaySalieri said:


> Any poll that does not place the big 3 in the top 3 slots is at fault.


It seems the TC community overrates Brahms (who is already overrated!)


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

This is amazing! Thank you!

EDIT: Alan Hovhaness was American.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

At the end of the day what do we know that we didn't know before ... not much as far as I can tell!


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Becca said:


> At the end of the day what do we know that we didn't know before ... not much as far as I can tell!


A lot less than "not much".


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Becca said:


> At the end of the day what do we know that we didn't know before ... not much as far as I can tell!


I would love to multiply your knowledge, but something times zero is still zero.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Whatever we learned, I'm just glad that Ives is in the top 50


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

chu42 said:


> Whatever we learned, I'm just glad that Ives is in the top 50


Ligeti and Schnittke, too!


----------



## Guest (Sep 1, 2019)

I checked the results using all tiers with a 10% decline rate per tier, and broadly agree with couchie's results given earlier. 

It was asked what happens if Wagner's "Ring" is treated as 4 separate works within tier 2. Couchie's results assume one single work. The table below shows the top 25 positions, Beethoven = 100. As will be seen, it makes a big difference to Wagner's position who leaps from 14th (15th on couchie's results) to 6th.

I agree with couchie that it does look as if Brahms is somewhat overrated on this works-based method. I wouldn't have been surprised if Brahms came in at 4th position (consistent with other TC polls) but he's now almost up there on a level with Beethoven, well ahead of the rest.

I suppose the merit of the tiers system it that one doesn't have to worry about the exact position of each work within its tier. The problem as I see it is that the single item in tier 1 looks a bit silly sitting there on its own, and I don't think there are sufficient items in tier 2. On the whole, it gives better results for deducing the top composers than I had expected.

1	-	Beethoven	(	100	)
2	-	Brahms	(	96	)
3	-	Bach	(	84	)
4	-	Mozart	(	68	)
5	-	Schubert	(	49	)
6	-	Wagner	(	43	)
7	-	Mahler	(	42	)
8	-	Shostakovich	(	28	)
9	-	Dvorak	(	26	)
10	-	Debussy	(	23	)
11	-	Sibelius	(	22	)
12	-	Tchaikovsky	(	20	)
13	-	Ravel	(	20	)
14	-	Mendessohn	(	20	)
15	-	Schumann	(	17	)
16	-	Prokofiev	(	16	)
17	-	Haydn, J	(	16	)
18	-	Faure	(	14	)
19	-	Bartok	(	14	)
20	-	Stravinsky	(	14	)
21	-	Rachmaninoff	(	12	)
22	-	Chopin	(	10	)
23	-	Strauss, R	(	8	)
24	-	Bruckner	(	8	)
25	-	Saint-Saens	(	7	)


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

I stopped reading when I saw math is involved.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Here's a ranking based on 1/sqrt, where n is the tier number.


*Rank**Row Labels**Score*1Beethoven17.412Bach14.283Mozart13.314Brahms12.955Schubert10.706Haydn9.247Shostakovich6.688Schumann6.669Prokofiev5.9910Debussy5.9611Dvořák5.8312Mendelssohn5.3713Tchaikovsky5.0414Bartók4.7615Ravel4.5816Wagner4.5317Fauré4.4618Mahler4.3619Stravinsky4.3520Sibelius4.2721Rachmaninoff3.9922Vaughan Williams3.9023Handel3.6324Messiaen3.4925Chopin3.4226Strauss3.3527Schoenberg3.2128Liszt3.1829Ligeti3.1730Barber3.0831Elgar2.9132Britten2.6833Martinů2.6534Saint-Saëns2.6235Hindemith2.4636Bruckner2.3837Berlioz2.3438Enescu2.3039Villa-Lobos2.3040Schnittke2.2941Vivaldi2.1642Janáček2.0943Poulenc2.0844Nielsen2.0745Adams1.9546Scriabin1.8747Copland1.8748Rimsky-Korsakov1.8649Grieg1.8650Verdi1.85

This has the effect of softening the decline and preventing lower-tier works from being "worthless" as observed in geometric and 1/n exponential declines. The difference is shown in this graph (in yellow):


----------



## Clouds Weep Snowflakes (Feb 24, 2019)

Jacques Offenbach the last? I didn't expect that...


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> Jacques Offenbach the last? I didn't expect that...


I have a feeling that TC is biased against opera that isn't Wagner, with Verdi at 49, Puccini at 59, and Donizetti, Gounod, Rossini, Sullivan, Meyerbeer, Bellini, Offenbach, at the bottom 10%. That is downright fantastical given their popularity in terms of annual performances.

Another weird thing is "Gilbert and Sullivan" listed when Sullivan was the composer and Gilbert wrote the libretti; he hardly counts as a composer, does he?

Nothing against the post itself (good work compiling), just some observations that were rather strange.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

chu42 said:


> I have a feeling that TC is biased against opera that isn't Wagner, with Verdi at 49, Puccini at 59, and Donizetti, Gounod, Rossini, Sullivan, Meyerbeer, Bellini, Offenbach, at the bottom 10%. That is downright fantastical given their popularity in terms of annual performances.
> 
> Another weird thing is "Gilbert and Sullivan" listed when Sullivan was the composer and Gilbert wrote the libretti; he hardly counts as a composer, does he?
> 
> Nothing against the post itself (good work compiling), just some observations that were rather strange.


True, the opera people tend to keep to themselves in the opera section.

G & S are generally referred to as being a paired deal. They have a combined Wikipedia page, for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_and_Sullivan


----------



## Guest (Sep 3, 2019)

@ Couchie

The composer results are obviously crucially dependent upon the acceptability of the placings of all the works, and their classification within the many tiers. 

I believe that all of these placements are based entirely on the collective views of a variable number of T-C members over the years. Is that correct?

If so, do you think that it might be useful to incorporate information based on other measures of popularity? Have any other measures been considered as additional items, e.g. CD lists?


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

Alright Gilbert & Sullivan! I still wish neuroscience was involved in the ranking...


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Partita said:


> I agree with couchie that it does look as if Brahms is somewhat overrated on this works-based method. I wouldn't have been surprised if Brahms came in at 4th position (consistent with other TC polls) but he's now almost up there on a level with Beethoven, well ahead of the rest.


I agree: composers should be judged based on their beards, not their works.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

The underlying problem here is that restricting the data set to TC participants creates a host of biases. Internet forum discussion groups tend to consist mainly of people with similar views to begin with who reinforce and confirm each others' views over time. A properly constructed poll group should consist of a randomly selected cross-section of all classical music listeners of all backgrounds, who one hopes arrive at their opinions independently of each other.

Having said that, as a willing participant here, it isn't surprising to me that Couchie's list of TC's most recommended classical composers corresponds more closely to my own preferences than the ranking I proposed in the other thread based simply on the number of in-print recordings listed at arkivmusic.com. The tastes and preferences of the TC audience and the overall classical music audience are significantly different, and my own preferences are more closely aligned with the former. Possible reasons include that more casual or occasional classical music listeners are under represented at TC, as are non-English speakers.

Still, thanks for that interesting list, Couchie.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

fluteman said:


> ...A properly constructed poll group should consist of a randomly selected cross-section of all classical music listeners of all backgrounds, who one hopes arrive at their opinions independently of each other.


I'm curious to know how you would select your sample, specifically who would qualify and who wouldn't. 

In short, what's a "classical music listener"?


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

KenOC said:


> I'm curious to know how you would select your sample, specifically who would qualify and who wouldn't.
> 
> In short, what's a "classical music listener"?


Right, that would be an important part of the poll design. People would have to answer questions relating to that subject, such as how many recordings they own of various types of music, how much time they spend listening to various kinds of music on radio or streaming services, how many times they go in person to concerts, etc. Then, I suppose people could be placed into categories of occasional classical music listeners, dedicated or full-time listeners, etc. People who do not listen to classical music at all would probably not have meaningful answers for many other questions one might ask.

The key is the population one draws these poll participants from. Best would be a truly random sample of people from all backgrounds and from all over the world. Of course, that would be difficult and expensive to obtain. That is why the ready-made data set of records and downloads purchased, streaming service usage, and any other data the commercial music industry can provide, though it may have its limitations, is so much easier to study.


----------



## Swosh (Feb 25, 2018)

Joachim Raff only at 104? This is ridiculousness of the highest


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Swosh said:


> Joachim Raff only at 104? This is ridiculousness of the highest


That sounds about right to me.


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

Swosh said:


> Joachim Raff only at 104? This is ridiculousness of the highest


He's above Rossini, which is actually more surprising.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Swosh said:


> Joachim Raff only at 104? This is ridiculousness of the highest


Indeed. Jazz musicians are known to incorporate short samples of this composer's music in their improvisations. The technique is known as Riff Raff.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

No one can complain about our ranking more than *the entire Renaissance*.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

fluteman said:


> The underlying problem here is that restricting the data set to TC participants creates a host of biases. Internet forum discussion groups tend to consist mainly of people with similar views to begin with who reinforce and confirm each others' views over time. A properly constructed poll group should consist of a randomly selected cross-section of all classical music listeners of all backgrounds, who one hopes arrive at their opinions independently of each other.


Even if one polls everyone, is it going to be correct, or does the right answer reside only with those of a higher understanding. That's the whole issue behind this.

To make the best list, we simply need a random sample of people with good musical taste! Not all these other crazy people! 

I do believe you're right in that the best composers are going to be starkly different depending on the demographic / musical philosophy. Is it worth it to even objectify.

If someone thinks _x_ is the best composer, and some objective sample says _y_, then inherently _y_ is wrong, and to all those individuals.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Couchie said:


> [TD]5[/TD]
> [TD]Franz Schubert[/TD]
> [TD="align: right"]1797[/TD]
> [TD="align: right"]1828[/TD]
> [TD]Austria[/TD]


I can't care less about TC rankings. I had already lost all faith in them upon seeing this: What is the greatest string quintet?
When it comes to certain semi-classical minimalists and miniaturists, "logic" seems to stop working in some people. 
And where's CPE Bach? 160? Are you kidding me


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Ethereality said:


> Even if one polls everyone, is it going to be correct, or does the right answer reside only with those of a higher understanding.


Or, maybe, a higher authority:


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

If one listens on the basis of mood and instinct, lists are more often than not non-essential except as a reminder of who most of the great names are. But following a specific hierarchy can be counter-intuitive because it might not match one's mood at the time. Nor do most lists have all the historically important or interesting composers, such as Stockhausen or Nono or countless others.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Larkenfield said:


> If one listens on the basis of mood and instinct, lists are more often than not non-essential except as a reminder of who most of the great names are. But following a specific hierarchy can be counter-intuitive because it might not match one's mood at the time. Nor do most lists have all the historically important or interesting composers, such as Stockhausen or Nono or countless others.


This list Stocks hausen and as for Nono: Yesyes, we do have him as well.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Ligeti, Messien, Schnittke, Martinu, et al above Verdi. Shows how ridiculous lists like this are!


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

We need a new thread: "Satie (118.) is greater than Telemann (148.)"

Btw. what is Korngold doing at the bottom(192.)? Oh, right... composing for films, which makes him ineligible for recommendations. What a fool!


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

The problem with this list is that that the results have been decided by people who never even come to the discussion forum to talk about any stuff. These are the same people who would do anything to have others believe Schubert wrote the greatest single solo keyboard work ever. What is the greatest string quintet?

Just go to the list and type Ctrl+F "piano sonata", "string quintet", "string quartet"
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18t_9MHZTENbmYdezAAj4LRM0-Eak_MYO1HssZW2FX1U/edit
take a look at where these are ranked:
Schubert: Piano Sonata #21 in B-flat, D. 960 [1828] 
Schubert: String Quintet in C, D. 956 [1828]
Schubert: String Quartet #14 in D minor, D. 810 "Death and the Maiden" [1824]

and look how many other works of the same genres rank above them.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

hammeredklavier said:


> The problem with this list is that that the results have been decided by people who never even come to the discussion forum to talk about any stuff. These are the same people who would do anything to have others believe Schubert wrote the greatest single solo keyboard work ever. What is the greatest string quintet?
> 
> Just go to the list and type Ctrl+F "piano sonata", "string quintet", "string quartet"
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18t_9MHZTENbmYdezAAj4LRM0-Eak_MYO1HssZW2FX1U/edit
> ...


There's no problem with the list. What could that even mean? The list is a product of many years of voting by perhaps 30-40 people who love classical music and have sampled a wide variety of works. Obviously the list reflects the tastes of those who voted. The list can be a useful path for those wishing to explore a little or a lot of classical music. I believe the process of producing the list has been enormously valuable and interesting to those who have participated. So that's great. As a participant, I would never suggest that the list is perfect or correct (again, what could that mean?), but I would suggest it as a guide for many but not for all.

Maybe you don't enjoy Schubert as much as many others do.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

DavidA said:


> Ligeti, Messien, Schnittke, Martinu, et al above Verdi. Shows how ridiculous lists like this are!


I'd put all four above Verdi.


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

I'm very proud to see three Germans occupying the first three places of the list (excellent work) despite I don't believe that Brahms deserves the 3rd place.

The 28th place for my master is sacrilege! :lol:


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Dimace said:


> I'm very proud to see three Germans occupying the first three places of the list (excellent work) despite I don't believe that Brahms deserves the 3rd place.


One again I agree: first or second place is more like it.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Talk Classical's Most Recommended Composers's Most Recommended Composer:

Mozart


I never really understood the criticism on this.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Here is a *critically acclaimed Top 50* where "public rating" is downplayed and "preference only to famous composers" is up-played. (Reason: Bias of 'public expectation' being limiting on the styles of famous composers, meaning, famous composers don't care for said composer's popular music, preferring lesser-known composers and works.)

1. Johann Sebastian Bach
2. Ludwig van Beethoven
3. Claude Debussy
4. Richard Wagner
5. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
6. Igor Stravinsky
7. Franz Liszt
8. Arnold Schoenberg
9. Frédéric Chopin
10. Robert Schumann
11. Maurice Ravel
12. Erik Satie
13. Béla Bartók
14. Anton Webern
15. Alexander Borodin
16. Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina
17. Carl Maria von Weber
18. Gioachino Rossini
19. Christoph Willibald Gluck
20. Dieterich Buxtehude
21. Johann Nepomuk Hummel
22. Hector Berlioz
23. Arvo Pärt
24. Steve Reich
25. Vincenzo Bellini
26. William Byrd
27. Richard Strauss
28. Michael Haydn
29. Jean-Baptiste Lully
30. Charles Ives
31. Alexander Scriabin
32. Ottorino Respighi
33. Tomás Luis de Victoria
34. Gaetano Donizetti
35. Aaron Copland
36. Guillaume de Machaut
37. George Gershwin
38. Alessandro Scarlatti
39. Johannes Brahms
40. Thomas Tallis
41. Frederick Delius
42. Domenico Scarlatti
43. Gustav Holst
44. Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber
45. Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov
46. Carlo Gesualdo
47. Felix Mendelssohn
48. Philip Glass
49. Gabriel Fauré
50. John Adams


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Here is a *temporally objective Top 30*, in other words, not the composers everyone likes but the material everyone likes that was borrowed from said composers indirectly.

1. Pérotinus Magnus
2. Johann Sebastian Bach
3. Guillaume de Machaut
4. Josquin des Prez
5. Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina
6. Ludwig van Beethoven
7. Thomas Tallis
8. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
9. Claudio Monteverdi
10. William Byrd
11. Tomás Luis de Victoria
12. Carlo Gesualdo
13. Richard Wagner
14. Jean-Baptiste Lully
15. George Frideric Handel
16. Dieterich Buxtehude
17. Domenico Scarlatti
18. Claude Debussy
19. Antonio Vivaldi
20. Franz Liszt
21. Joseph Haydn
22. Heinrich Ignaz Franz Biber
23. Robert Schumann
24. Frédéric Chopin
25. Christoph Willibald Gluck
26. Henry Purcell
27. Igor Stravinsky
28. Jean-Philippe Rameau
29. Alessandro Scarlatti
30. Georg Philipp Telemann


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Here is *Talk Classical's Top 100*. There have been multiple attempts to capture this forum's favorites composers. One method was a game where you can add and subtract to a list every day, but this showed some bias, as the list evolved people would not necessarily focus on their favorites but would just want to change the list around. This is a bad thing or a good thing, we don't know, but the bigger issue was that some people played the game more without any reason as to why they should. Another method was through a poll where you're allowed to vote for 1-3 composers. Unfortunately this was only limited to 3 and was a very small poll. Not enough data. The final method I spent some time finding, and was satisfied. In 2012 and 2013, each member posted just one list, it was of their Top 10 _Favorites_ and not the Top 10 Greatest, and had no knowledge that the thread was going to be tabulated, with all the nuance of their ordering included. Look at #17! Surprising. Anyway, this is that list. _Exciting,_ I know...

1. Bach, Johann Sebastian
2. Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus
3. Beethoven, Ludwig van
4. Brahms, Johannes
5. Schubert, Franz
6. Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyich
7. Schumann, Robert
8. Handel, George Frideric
9. Verdi, Giuseppe
10. Mendelssohn, Felix
11. Debussy, Claude
12. Chopin, Frédéric
13. Liszt, Franz
14. Haydn, Franz Joseph
15. Ravel, Maurice
16. Vivaldi, Antonio
17. Wagner, Richard
18. Strauss, Richard
19. Dvorák, Antonín
20. Puccini, Giacomo
21. Prokofiev, Sergei
22. Rachmaninov, Sergei
23. Shostakovich, Dmitri
24. Saint-Saëns, Camille
25. Rossini, Gioachino
26. Mahler, Gustav
27. Fauré, Gabriel
28. Stravinsky, Igor
29. Grieg, Edvard
30. Bizet, Georges
31. Britten, Benjamin
32. Donizetti, Gaetano
33. Gounod, Charles
34. Elgar, Sir Edward
35. Bartók, Béla
36. Massenet, Jules
37. Sibelius, Jean
38. Gershwin, George
39. Telemann, Georg Philipp
40. Franck, César
41. Bruckner, Anton
42. Vaughan Williams, Ralph
43. Strauss Jr., Johann
44. Mussorgsky, Modest
45. Berlioz, Hector
46. Rimsky-Korsakov, Nikolai
47. Purcell, Henry
48. Poulenc, Francis
49. Falla, Manuel de
50. Weber, Carl Maria von
51. Bernstein, Leonard
52. Copland, Aaron
53. Bellini, Vincenzo
54. Scarlatti, Domenico
55. Villa-Lobos, Heitor
56. Barber, Samuel
57. Hindemith, Paul
58. Gluck, Christoph W.
59. Monteverdi, Claudio
60. Scriabin, Alexander
61. Albeniz, Isaac
62. Paganini, Niccolò
63. Offenbach, Jacques
64. Satie, Erik
65. Byrd, William
66. Mascagni, Pietro
67. Holst, Gustav
68. Granados, Enrique
69. Leoncavallo, Ruggero
70. Janácek, Leos
71. Smetana, Bedrich
72. Kreisler, Fritz
73. Rodrigo, Joaquin
74. Respighi, Ottorino
75. Pachelbel, Johann
76. Borodin, Alexander
77. Nielsen, Carl
78. Walton, Sir William
79. Rameau, Jean-Philippe
80. Khachaturian, Aram
81. Boccherini, Luigi
82. Lehár, Franz
83. Delibes, Léo
84. Ives, Charles
85. Bruch, Max
86. Corelli, Arcangelo
87. Albinoni, Tomaso
88. Glazunov, Alexander
89. Pärt, Arvo
90. Korngold, Erich Wolfgang
91. Sarasate, Pablo de
92. Bloch, Ernest
93. Delius, Frederick
94. Ponce, Manuel
95. Hummel, Johann Nepomuk
96. Arnold, Malcolm
97. Bach, Johann Christian
98. Lully, Jean-Baptiste
99. Marais, Marin
100. Rautavaara, Einojuhani


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Ethereality said:


> Here is a *critically acclaimed Top 50* where "public rating" is downplayed and "preference only to famous composers" is up-played. (Reason: Bias of 'public expectation' being limiting on the styles of famous composers, meaning, famous composers don't care for said composer's popular music, preferring lesser-known composers and works.)


I lost all respect for this ranking once I saw that Handel (who was absolutely idolized by Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven) doesn't have a place in the top 50. I remember it's even from a random blog with no authenticity in its finding and gathering of data.


----------



## Swosh (Feb 25, 2018)

Raff belongs in the top 25 ever.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

I've read a sentiment today that Brahms is a listener's composer, but not really a composer's composer. Popular among general audience, but very few composers ever talk about him as an inspiration relative to other greats.

Since of all music discussion sites / music polls / ranked lists I've checked it is Talk Classical that rates Brahms the highest (not somewhere between 7 and 20, but _within the top 5_) I wonder what are the reasons (in the view of the community here) for the judgements of the rest of the world being soo wrong about him.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Fabulin said:


> I've read a sentiment today that Brahms is a listener's composer, but not really a composer's composer. Popular among general audience, but very few composers ever talk about him as an inspiration relative to other greats.
> 
> Since of all music discussion sites / music polls / ranked lists I've checked it is Talk Classical that rates Brahms the highest (not somewhere between 7 and 20, but _within the top 5_) I wonder what are the reasons (in the view of the community here) for the judgements of the rest of the world being soo wrong about him.


Other composers' lack of enthusiasm for Brahms: a mix of envy and resentment.


----------



## Caryatid (Mar 28, 2020)

Fabulin said:


> I've read a sentiment today that Brahms is a listener's composer, but not really a composer's composer. Popular among general audience, but very few composers ever talk about him as an inspiration relative to other greats.
> 
> Since of all music discussion sites / music polls / ranked lists I've checked it is Talk Classical that rates Brahms the highest (not somewhere between 7 and 20, but _within the top 5_) I wonder what are the reasons (in the view of the community here) for the judgements of the rest of the world being soo wrong about him.


I'm not sure we are as much an outlier as you think. If I remember right, a few years ago a New York Times online poll ranked Brahms fourth or fifth. And that sort of placing is in line with how he often he is performed. Bachtrack publishes statistics about concerts, and Brahms is among the five most frequently performed composers in the world.


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

:tiphat: Kushie...


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Fabulin said:


> I've read a sentiment today that Brahms is a listener's composer, but not really a composer's composer.


There must be a lot of bad composers out there.


----------

