# Composers/music whose value to you depends the most on the performance



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

This might be a stupid post, but title says it all (though not very well...), what music (/ composers) do you think depends on having a good interpretation rather than a bad or even average one? (By bad, I don't necessarily mean wrong notes, etc, but I mean a performance that you do not think suits the style of the music or captures its "essence".) On the contrary, what music (/ composers) do you enjoy regardless of whether the interpretation is outstanding or not?

In the former category I'd put many of the works of Chopin (the nocturnes, some of the mazurkas and polonaises), Bruckner, Rachmaninoff, Liszt, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, Scarlatti and even some Debussy and some Mozart (the piano sonatas for instance), and in the latter category I'd put (obviously) Bach, Brahms, Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Messiaen, Ravel, Faure, and Prokofiev. This does not mean that there is only one way to "correctly" play composers in the first category, or that the music of composers in the second category don't benefit from having a good interpretation.

Some of these are more assumptions than anything since I'm not really big on comparative performances for the most part. And, of course, these are all generalizations, and for the most part do not apply to all of the works of the composers I've listed in either category.

Particularly wondering about your thoughts on which of these categories Sibelius and Mahler (orchestral works) would fit into?


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

For me it's Brahms' orchestral works and Chopin. I can like or hate the music depending on the performance. Pretty much everything else is less dependent on performance.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

The symphonies of Wilhelm Furtwangler. In most recordings they sound awful - long, boring, endlessly wandering. Then along comes a stunner of the 2nd symphony with Barenboim and Chicago. A great orchestra and conductor and suddenly this once intractable symphony comes to life.

Truly great music can withstand second and third rate performances. A Mahler symphony presented in Tucson, Cheyenne, Tulsa, Amarillo, El Paso, Grand Rapids, Erie and elsewhere may not sound as perfect as a performance in Chicago, Berlin, or New York, but it's still thrilling and worthwhile.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> A Mahler symphony presented in Tucson, Cheyenne, Tulsa, Amarillo, El Paso, Grand Rapids, Erie and elsewhere may not sound as perfect as a performance in Chicago, Berlin, or New York, but it's still thrilling and worthwhile.


That's funny -- there are Mahler Symphonies for which the performance is key to whether or not not I bother to keep listening. Although there are some performer-proof movements, like the completed first movement of the Tenth and most of the Fourth.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I have little interest in 19th century Italian opera unless it's performed by truly great singers with vocal technique and dramatic power to spare. Melodies of Bellini and Donizetti that can sound merely pretty take on pathos and depth when a singer like Maria Callas (OK, there is no singer "like" Maria Callas) takes hold of them.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

When I was 10, my father took me to see Ein Deutsces Requiem with an amateur orchestra in Nairobi. I loved Mozart, Bach and Schubert then. The result was 15 years without Brahms...Now I enjoy anything that's played with heart and soul


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I'm particular about John Cage. Cage once remarked after a bad performance by unsympathetic musicians, "I give players freedom, and they end up making fools of themselves." It seems that any music which is dependent on player's input to this degree (even more than precisely scored music) is 'fragile' in this regard. This would include Morton Feldman and Ligeti as well.

Also, Bach. I hear a lot of what I call mediocre Bach performances. I like Glenn Gould, Richter, and certain other performances involving Yehudi Menuhin. 

And Vivaldi. Currently, I am spoiled by Giuliano Carmignola.

Handel arias, but only if sung by Lorraine Hunt-Lieberson. Handel Suites for Keyboard, but only by Richter.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

At the top of my list would be Hector Berlioz. He has to be done right or his works can fall apart and become tedious, long-winded and a snoozefest. Colin Davis is one of the few conductors who seems to know how to conduct him, and when done in the proper spirit Berlioz can be a thrilling composer. The Royal Philharmonic (one of my favorite orchestras) also knows how to get the best out of the Berlioz:

https://www.amazon.com/Little-Big-Overtures-Various-artists/dp/B00X512VD0


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Scriabin is a big one for me, the solo piano music. A lot of pianists completely miss the point and the end result is just boring. It wasn't until I heard Sofronitsky that I became a (huge) fan. 

I feel similarly about Debussy. It takes a special kind of pianist to get it right. Though I would say his orchestral works are a little more "performer-proof" (still hard to play on a technical level of course). 

Handel's orchestral music I can only really appreciate on period instruments. One of the few composers for which this is the case for me. I normally don't care about so-called anachronism in music much at all.


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

millionrainbows said:


> I'm particular about John Cage. Cage once remarked after a bad performance by unsympathetic musicians, "I give players freedom, and they end up making fools of themselves." It seems that any music which is dependent on player's input to this degree (even more than precisely scored music) is 'fragile' in this regard. This would include Morton Feldman and Ligeti as well.
> 
> Also, Bach. I hear a lot of what I call mediocre Bach performances. I like Glenn Gould, Richter, and certain other performances involving Yehudi Menuhin.
> 
> ...


I agree, John Cage. I can't tell you how many times I've seen a pianist lift his or her fingertips off the keyboard *prior* to the end of the second movement of _4' 33"_. In addition, on several occasions I've timed performances in the 4' 30" to 4' 32" range and personally felt cheated. It's a very precise work.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

For me, it's Brahms head and shoulders above all others, particularly if I feel satisfaction with the kinds of nuances a conductor conveys in interpreting his music.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Pretty much all solo piano music. If I don't like the sound of the instrument or the pianist's phrasing, it really bugs me. 

As far as orchestral music is concerned, it's a matter of tempo, articulation of certain phrases, dynamics, and overall attention to detail. And with many of us I'm sure conditioning plays a part. The imprint of initial exposure to a particular recording. Composers in particular don't really matter for me.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

For me it tends to be the works I have heard very often and in numerous different accounts. A lot of Beethoven orchestral performances bore me these days. But some can really get to me. And Brahms: performances that lack warmth seem to miss the point as far as I am concerned.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Room2201974 said:


> I agree, John Cage. I can't tell you how many times I've seen a pianist lift his or her fingertips off the keyboard *prior* to the end of the second movement of _4' 33"_. In addition, on several occasions I've timed performances in the 4' 30" to 4' 32" range and personally felt cheated. It's a very precise work.


Really? I'll have to check out that piece, I've never heard it. Of course, I'm in outer space, and there's no atmosphere to transmit ambient sounds. :lol:


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Larkenfield said:


> At the top of my list would be Hector Berlioz. He has to be done right or his works can fall apart and become tedious, long-winded and a snoozefest. Colin Davis is one of the few conductors who seems to know how to conduct him, and when done in the proper spirit Berlioz can be a thrilling composer. The Royal Philharmonic (one of my favorite orchestras) also knows how to get the best out of the Berlioz:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Little-Big-Overtures-Various-artists/dp/B00X512VD0


Absolutely correct - except replace Davis with Dorati.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

Larkenfield said:


> At the top of my list would be Hector Berlioz. He has to be done right or his works can fall apart and become tedious, long-winded and a snoozefest. Colin Davis is one of the few conductors who seems to know how to conduct him, and when done in the proper spirit Berlioz can be a thrilling composer. The Royal Philharmonic (one of my favorite orchestras) also knows how to get the best out of the Berlioz:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Little-Big-Overtures-Various-artists/dp/B00X512VD0


Indeed, the Colin Davis Berlioz recordings on Philips are considered definitive by some critics.


----------

