# Most overrated music?



## KenOC

If I see the word "underrated" around here again, I swear I'm gonna puke my toes right out through my glottis! So instead I ask, Which works in the canon are the most _overrated_, stealing mindshare and earshare from far more deserving music?

If nothing else, a chance for a therapeutic rant. 

(No doubt a repeat thread, but so be it.)


----------



## Autocrat

Handel, _Messiah_.
J. Strauss II, _Everything_.


----------



## isorhythm

Someone is going to say Shostakovich, someone else is going to say Schoenberg, this is not going to end happily. Prove me wrong, TalkClassical!

I'm going to come out of left field and say _Palestrina_. A great composer, to be sure, but doesn't deserve to be virtually synonymous with 16th century polyphony at the expense of so many other equally great composers.


----------



## GreenMamba

Mozart. I have him rated a 94.7/100 while the consensus average seems to be he's around 95.5 or even 96. So he's overrated.


----------



## Guest

Puccini. 15 Characters.


----------



## KenOC

isorhythm said:


> I'm going to come out of left field and say _Palestrina_. A great composer, to be sure, but doesn't deserve to be virtually synonymous with 16th century polyphony at the expense of so many other equally great composers.


Interesting. Even Ludwig van B, commenting on his researches while working on the _Missa_, mentioned only Palestrina by name. Why?


----------



## Richannes Wrahms

Verdi. 15 Characters.


----------



## Le Peel

Autocrat said:


> J. Strauss II, _Everything_.


What, do you have something against fun?


----------



## brotagonist

I might have to sleep on it to come up with something, but off the top of my head, I'd say there is no such thing as overrated music. Some pieces are very, very popular and have remained so for decades, even centuries, likely with good reason. While I don't care to hear _only_ those works, I do want to hear them. For those of you in the music business, they may just about make you ill, but for a fairly informed hobby listener like me, enjoyable music is enjoyable music. A good number of the composers/pieces mentioned so far are ones I have never heard  or heard only a few times, while some so-called underrated music (oops! KenOC ) gets played an awful lot at my place.


----------



## Woodduck

Richard Strauss. Interestingly, he didn't overrate himself ("I may not be a first-rate composer, but I am a first-class second-rate composer").

But Johann Strauss? Overrated? Who even worries about rating him? Just put your arms around her and dance, for heaven's sake.


----------



## ArtMusic

Bruckner symphonies are epic in scale but a touch overrated.


----------



## Woodduck

ArtMusic said:


> Bruckner symphonies are epic in scale but a touch overrated.


Except by the numerous people who don't like them. Those who do have to restore the balance.


----------



## KenOC

How about Beethoven, in his late works? "Hey Schindler! I've found an easy way to sound really profound! You just take some diminished seventh chords, like these, and..." The rest is history.


----------



## Woodduck

KenOC said:


> How about Beethoven, in his late works? "Hey Schindler! I've found an easy way to sound really profound! You just take some diminished seventh chords, like these, and..." The rest is history.


Well at last someone has the courage to say it!

If you'd been there to advise him that fugue might have been a lot less gross.


----------



## KenOC

Woodduck said:


> If you'd been there to advise him that fugue might have been a lot less gross.


I would have encouraged him. Today it'd be known as the Gross-out Fugue.


----------



## Weston

Off the top of my head, Mendelssohn. Oh yes he was prodigy. Yes his Octet composed when he was 16 is amazing on paper. I just seldom want to hear it. With a few prominent exceptions (Hebrides, some of Midsummer Night's Dream and the Songs Without Words), much of his work is so frenetic I feel my blood pressure rise, and I don't need that. The guy should have cut back on the coffee or something.


----------



## Avey

I am not a huge fan of *Rachmaninov*. Overrated? I don't think so. But I do find his music to be a bit generic, or too trite for the era. Again, though, I just don't listen to his music. I don't enjoy it enough. So I am unsure if that means he is overrated. I know he is played live all the time and many people are aware of his music. Thus, I figure he may fit the bill.

But if thinking purely on popularity and whether that fact is justified: *Tchaikovsky*. Some great stuff, but way to overplayed. So many other works sound like his (Russian or beyond) AND other composers do exactly what he did, but better! P.T has some amazing material, but he is far too overplayed in concert halls, on recordings, and radio. Let us go beyond!

Also -- ah! -- I would say *Shostakovich*, simply because I do not enjoy his music as much as (it seems) many others do.

Edit: I do not hate Russians! Seriously, yo.


----------



## Woodduck

Weston said:


> Off the top of my head, Mendelssohn. Oh yes he was prodigy. Yes his Octet composed when he was 16 is amazing on paper. I just seldom want to hear it. With a few prominent exceptions (Hebrides, some of Midsummer Night's Dream and the Songs Without Words), much of his work is so frenetic I feel my blood pressure rise, and I don't need that. The guy should have cut back on the coffee or something.


Do you like the Symphony #3, the "Scottish"? Passionate and energetic, but not frenetic at all compared to that madly bubbly "Italian." Also try the String Quartet in A-minor, op. 13. Two of his most glorious masterpieces. You might even stop thinking he's overrated!

:tiphat:


----------



## Marschallin Blair

The appalling elephantiasis of Wagner comes to mind.

If he could smarm down a bit from trying to write music for the latest _Mad Max_ film perphaps he could write something as ineffably elegant as _Der Rosenkavalier._

Then again, perhaps not.

_;D_


----------



## Haydn man

This Haydn guy seems overrated to me
104 attempts at a symphony, come on surely he could have thinned a few out 
All those string quartets, piano sonatas. I could could go on, but the Haydn lovers will be calling for blood


----------



## Guest

Albert7 can post until anyone or anything is overrated, y'all.

I swore for a second there that Helen Grime was the *real* "Little Miss Mozart".


----------



## elgar's ghost

I'd love to post on this thread as it would pander to my occasional need for what I call therapeutic negativity but I know that once I do I'll probably regret it instantly - I want to avoid the booby-trap of nominating anyone's music as being overrated just because I happen to loathe it.


----------



## Skilmarilion

Weston said:


> Off the top of my head, Mendelssohn. Oh yes he was prodigy. * Yes his Octet composed when he was 16 is amazing on paper. *


I always found it odd that Mendelssohn gets penalised for his incredibly strong youth output, as if him writing the Octet at 16 meant he should have been writing Bruckner's 8th by the age of 35.

Lets not forget, he was not a prolific composer a la Mozart and Schubert, and so his untimely death is particularly poignant. Imagine if Brahms, for instance, had died at 38...

But anyway, some of Felix's most brilliant stuff is from the very last years of his life: Violin Concerto, 3rd Symphony, 2nd Piano Trio (the first movement of this alone nearly blows away everything he'd written before, and yet he viewed this work as a failure), 6th Quartet, etc.

So any of this "Mendelssohn was a prodigy who didn't quite make it in maturity", is nonsense I say.



Avey said:


> But if thinking purely on popularity and whether that fact is justified: *Tchaikovsky*. Some great stuff, but way to overplayed. *So many other works sound like his (Russian or beyond) AND other composers do exactly what he did, but better!.*


Like?


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Ummmm I can't think of any music which is overrated. As far as I can tell, there's something to be found in every piece written. Even Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance March no. 1 I wouldn't call overrated no matter how much I hate it despite its popularity. It has it's time and place and it is a well constructed piece of music for what it is and for what Elgar intended it to be. Even so, I hate it despite its popularity!


----------



## Cesare Impalatore

isorhythm said:


> Someone is going to say Shostakovich, someone else is going to say Schoenberg, this is not going to end happily. Prove me wrong, TalkClassical!
> 
> I'm going to come out of left field and say _Palestrina_. A great composer, to be sure, but doesn't deserve to be virtually synonymous with 16th century polyphony at the expense of so many other equally great composers.


First you voice concern that this thread might not end well and then you go straight for one of the absolute foundation pillars of western civilization? :lol:

Haydn, Verdi, Puccini, Tchaikovsky, J. Strauss II, even Palestrina; this thread is pretty damn depressing for me.


----------



## Celloman

_Carmina Burana_ is overrated.

_Bolero_ is overrated.

Mahler's _Symphony No. 2_ is overrated in the sense that it's far from the best work in his canon.


----------



## Dim7

Woodduck said:


> But Johann Strauss? Overrated? Who even worries about rating him? Just put your arms around her and dance, for heaven's sake.


You seem confused about his/her gender.

Gender of Johann Strauss, that is.


----------



## Albert7

There isn't anything which is overrated to me. Even Havergal Brian's legacy is properly assessed to me.

It's all good in the hood as we have expected.


----------



## sharik

Woodduck said:


> Richard Strauss.


i strongly disagree with that.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Celloman said:


> _Carmina Burana_ is overrated.
> _Bolero_ is overrated.
> 
> Mahler's _Symphony No. 2_ is overrated in the sense that it's far from the best work in his canon.


I don't think Carmina Burana is overrated - the problem lies mainly with the fact that there are too many recordings of this and not enough of Orff's other fine works, which gives the erroneous impression that CB was the only worthwhile thing he ever composed.


----------



## isorhythm

KenOC said:


> Interesting. Even Ludwig van B, commenting on his researches while working on the _Missa_, mentioned only Palestrina by name. Why?


I think Palestrina was the only one who was widely known at that time, though I'm not sure about this. I know Bach also studied Palestrina and even arranged some of his masses.


----------



## norman bates

Albert7 said:


> There isn't anything which is overrated to me. Even Havergal Brian's legacy is properly assessed to me.
> 
> It's all good in the hood as we have expected.


what do you mean, that we live in a absolutely perfect meritocracy or that value doesn't exist?


----------



## Woodduck

Dim7 said:


> You seem confused about his/her gender.


The lady in the room did not want to be identified by name, but wants it known that she is available for dancing.


----------



## Avey

Skilmarilion said:


> Like?


Well, I would say...

Any of Prokofiev's, Stravinsky's Greek ballets > All of P.T.'s ballets

Sibelius' 4th, 5th, 7th, e.g. >> P.T.'s 4th, 5th, 6th

Gliere's Ilya Muromets >>>> Manfred Symphony

Again, purely my opinion. And largely, as I said, this has to do with the airtime his works get. I have a feeling his name sells well in the community, especially for performance halls. I mean, who wants to go see Gliere's 3rd?

Actually, this has everything to do with performance ratio, because I always go see Tchaikovsky sets, because I like his music, because I do think he should be performed. But so much so as to avoid these other artists? No, and that is why he is overrated.


----------



## SeptimalTritone

Mahler's second symphony.

Because every symphony afterwards is better, in my opinion. Yet for some reason (I have no idea why) people really gravitate towards the second.


----------



## Celloman

norman bates said:


> what do you mean, that we live in a absolutely perfect meritocracy or that value doesn't exist?


Value is nothing but a social construct. Didn't you know that?


----------



## Headphone Hermit

Well, there are plenty on this thread who appear 'over rated' .... but few, very few, were composers :devil:


----------



## Woodduck

Marschallin Blair said:


> The appalling elephantiasis of Wagner comes to mind.
> 
> If he could smarm down a bit from trying to write music for the latest _Mad Max_ film perphaps he could write something as ineffably elegant as _Der Rosenkavalier._
> 
> Then again, perhaps not.
> 
> _;D_


No, Wagner could never have done what Strauss did. It would never have occurred to Wagner not to supply actual music throughout an entire opera from beginning to end. With Strauss, a few moments of actual music will typically be preceded and followed by ten or twenty minutes of sound and fury provided by several indistinguishable German sopranos named Elisabeth (they can tell each other apart even if we can't) gabbling tunelessly about vulgar relatives or randy transvestites or being stranded on Greek islands or something, while the musicians in the orchestra play ping pong with bits and fragments of scales and chords and can't decide what key to play in. Perhaps they're rehearsing while the singers chat, or perhaps their contracts require them to remain in their seats and do something to earn their pay (we can rest assured, at least, that they aren't paid by the note, otherwise no theater could afford to mount a Strauss opera). In any case if you're listening at home there's probably time to go to the bathroom and fix a snack before the next ineffably elegant tune appears. But hurry back, or you might miss it and not hear another one until all the Elisabeths get together at the end, stop their effable chitchat, and give us some splendid three-part harmony. Now that's effing fabulous!

Needless to say I am not speaking of the opera which ends in decapitation, necrophilia, and filicide. You don't want a snack during that one.


----------



## dwindladwayne

Karlheinz Stockhausen. I prefer Nono or Dallapiccola


----------



## DavidA

dwindladwayne said:


> Karlheinz Stockhausen. I prefer Nono or Dallapiccola


I think the spelling for Nono should be No! no!


----------



## DiesIraeCX

DavidA said:


> I think the spelling for Nono should be No! no!


What I've heard so far has made me say Yes yes, more musica, per favore. 

I accidentally came across his music, I picked up a used recording of Mahler's _Kindertotenlieder_ (Abbado, Lipovsek), it came coupled with Luigi Nono's _Il Canto Sospeso_, it's a great "entry-level" work for anyone genuinely interested in his music.


----------



## Orfeo

_Overrated_ *or* _over-played_. There is a distinction, however fine it is on occasion. Puccini, for instance, is rated, and rightly so, as one of the pinnacles in Italian opera. And yet, some of his operas are not well performed as, say, Tosca or Madama Butterfly. The Girl of the Golden West comes to mind quite readily. There are other instances where some of Shostakovich's works (Fifth, Seventh Symphonies, Piano Concerto no. 1) are over-exposed at the expense of better deserving pieces, like his Eighth Symphony, his First Piano Sonata, or even his Fourth Symphony. Most of Bruckner's symphonies are not as often played as some of Mahler's symphonies, especially in the United States.

Elgars ghosts made a valid point above (re: Orff's Carmina Burana).


----------



## dwindladwayne

DavidA said:


> I think the spelling for Nono should be No! no!


Eheheh, Nice try !


----------



## Guest

DiesIraeCX said:


> What I've heard so far has made me say Yes yes, more musica, per favore.
> 
> I accidentally came across his music, I picked up a used recording of Mahler's _Kindertotenlieder_ (Abbado, Lipovsek), it came coupled with Luigi Nono's _Il Canto Sospeso_, it's a great "entry-level" work *for anyone genuinely interested in his music*.


You're kinda barking up the wrong tree with this reply, mate.


----------



## Guest

Joyce Hatto's recordings were a little over-rated.









http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyce_Hatto

Quite the scandal actually. Those of you who don't know the story should definitely read the link.


----------



## Becca

How about P.D.Q. Bach?


----------



## Albert7

For me I'm getting to feel that the semantics of the overrated music is similar to asking who are some of the worst composers are. :\

it's like looking at a half empty cup and realizing that being half full is way too optimistic.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Woodduck said:


> No, Wagner could never have done what Strauss did. It would never have occurred to Wagner not to supply actual music throughout an entire opera from beginning to end. With Strauss, a few moments of actual music will typically be preceded and followed by ten or twenty minutes of sound and fury provided by several indistinguishable German sopranos named Elisabeth (they can tell each other apart even if we can't) gabbling tunelessly about vulgar relatives or randy transvestites or being stranded on Greek islands or something, while the musicians in the orchestra play ping pong with bits and fragments of scales and chords and can't decide what key to play in. Perhaps they're rehearsing while the singers chat, or perhaps their contracts require them to remain in their seats and do something to earn their pay (we can rest assured, at least, that they aren't paid by the note, otherwise no theater could afford to mount a Strauss opera). In any case if you're listening at home there's probably time to go to the bathroom and fix a snack before the next ineffably elegant tune appears. But hurry back, or you might miss it and not hear another one until all the Elisabeths get together at the end, stop their effable chitchat, and give us some splendid three-part harmony. Now that's effing fabulous!
> 
> Needless to say I am not speaking of the opera which ends in decapitation, necrophilia, and filicide. You don't want a snack during that one.


You say the cutest things- but in all fairness is Richard the First to be outdone?

The opening aquarium scene of _Das Rheingold_ where the Real Rhinemaidens of Orange County go on with their phatic emotings of "_Weia! Waga! Waga la Weia! Wallala, weiala weia!_" over their gold baubles was lifted directly from the Chanel outlet at South Coast Plaza in Newport Beach, California- well, that is to say, 'minus the _purloined Mendelssohn_,' it was.


----------



## Woodduck

Marschallin Blair said:


> You say the cutest things- but in all fairness is Richard the First to be outdone?
> 
> The opening aquarium scene of _Das Rheingold_ where the Real Rhinemaidens of Orange County go on with their phatic emotings of "_Weia! Waga! Waga la Weia! Wallala, weiala weia!_" over their gold baubles was lifted directly from the Chanel outlet at South Coast Plaza in Newport Beach, California- well, that is to say, 'minus the _purloined Mendelssohn_,' it was.




"Lesser artists borrow, great artists steal." - Igor Stravinsky

Wagner knew from whom to steal. Strauss merely stole from himself -again and again and again.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Woodduck said:


> "Lesser artists borrow, great artists steal." - Igor Stravinsky
> 
> Wagner knew from whom to steal. Strauss merely stole from himself -again and again and again.


'Did' he?

Well Strauss must have got his cue from the Great German Master Himself:

The _Overture to Act III of Siegfried_ has the riding motif as a violin accompaniment, Erda's motif, the power of the gods motif, Wotan's frustration motif, the spear motif, the nature motif, Twilight of the Gods motif, and the Wanderer motif all at the same time- and then the Rhinegold motif and the Magic Fire motif as well.

A serial self-plagiarist not unlike Strauss if ever there was- unless of course we call it '_leitmotiving_.'


----------



## Bevo

I'm sure I'm going to regret saying this, but for me it's Debussy. Sure he did some interesting work, and was very talented, but I just don't care for his style much (that's just me). I'm also not a huge fan of nearly any 20th century music. I don't know, maybe it's just because I started getting into the genre beginning with the Classical Era, so atonal music just seems unnatural to me, but that's just my take. And if we're go beyond Classical music, then I say the vast majority of songwriters nowadays (minus film and jazz composers). "Let's see, what chord progression should I use... Oh, I know! I, IV, V, I, IV, V, etc..." lol


----------



## mcaparula

Orfeo said:


> _Overrated_ *or* _over-played_. There is a distinction, however fine it is on occasion. Puccini, for instance, is rated, and rightly so, as one of the pinnacles in Italian opera. And yet, some of his operas are not well performed as, say, Tosca or Madama Butterfly. The Girl of the Golden West comes to mind quite readily. There are other instances where some of Shostakovich's works (Fifth, Seventh Symphonies, Piano Concerto no. 1) are over-exposed at the expense of better deserving pieces, like his Eighth Symphony, his First Piano Sonata, or even his Fourth Symphony. Most of Bruckner's symphonies are not as often played as some of Mahler's symphonies, especially in the United States.
> 
> Elgars ghosts made a valid point above (re: Orff's Carmina Burana).


Wondering if someone was going to mention Puccini. He wrote music to make some good money. That's all. He was the Michael Bay of late-nineteenth century opera. Nothing better than a bunch of gushy arias (Tosca, Madama Butterfly, Turandot,..etc.) to fill the houses. I believe La Boheme is his only creation that actually has some musical merit. Again, my opinion.


----------



## Woodduck

mcaparula said:


> Wondering if someone was going to mention Puccini. He wrote music to make some good money. That's all. He was the Michael Bay of late-nineteenth century opera. Nothing better than a bunch of gushy arias (Tosca, Madama Butterfly, Turandot,..etc.) to fill the houses. I believe La Boheme is his only creation that actually has some musical merit. Again, my opinion.


It's interesting that you choose _Boheme_ as the Puccini work with the most musical merit. I find it one of his least interesting works musically, along with _Tosca_. I believe these are his most popular operas, which I'm inclined to attribute to their numerous "hit" tunes. But many of his less-often-heard works are subtler and more daring, harmonically and orchestrally. Have you listened much to them? My favorite is "La Fanciulla del West," a piece filled with fascinating color and atmosphere, and pretty short on "gushy arias"! I can assure you that Puccini had more than money in mind as he composed, and his work earned the respect of contemporary composers, including, interestingly, Arnold Schoenberg.


----------



## brotagonist

Woodduck said:


> My favorite is "La Fanciulla del West," a piece filled with fascinating color and atmosphere, and pretty short on "gushy arias"! I can assure you that Puccini had more than money in mind as he composed, and his work earned the respect of contemporary composers, including, interestingly, Arnold Schoenberg.


Puccini considered it to be his best work. It's the only one I have and I chose it for that... kind of a 'grow into' piece for me  Thanks for the affirmation.


----------



## Mahlerian

Woodduck said:


> I can assure you that Puccini had more than money in mind as he composed, and his work earned the respect of contemporary composers, including, interestingly, Arnold Schoenberg.


The admiration was mutual. Puccini went out of his way to attend and support a performance of Pierrot lunaire, and Schoenberg inserted a Puccini quote in his (miserably failed) stab at domestic comedy _Von Heute auf Morgen_.


----------



## Cesare Impalatore

mcaparula said:


> Wondering if someone was going to mention Puccini. He wrote music to make some good money. That's all. He was the Michael Bay of late-nineteenth century opera. Nothing better than a bunch of gushy arias (Tosca, Madama Butterfly, Turandot,..etc.) to fill the houses. I believe La Boheme is his only creation that actually has some musical merit. Again, my opinion.


I'm sorry but you sound like someone who never listened to a Puccini opera properly, except maybe for two or three of those "gushy" arias sung by some pompous concert tenor post-1990. Puccini composed only for money? Michael Bay of opera? This is not just ridiculous, it's plain blasphemy. Italian opera audiences back in the late 19th century were not uncultured sheep like modern mainstream, Puccini was only popular thanks to his supreme artistry. Can you explain to me where the _gushy_ lies in an aria like _In questa reggia_ for example?


----------



## quack

There's nowhere near enough explosions in Puccini.


----------



## Woodduck

quack said:


> There's nowhere near enough explosions in Puccini.


Ask for a chemistry set for your birthday.


----------



## quack

Now i'm wondering if there are any explosions in opera. Sounds like the kind of thing some enterprising opera composer might add in for the scandal and excitement. I mean actually part of the opera and music rather than the setting. There's not a lot of war in opera unless it is as a background to the events although there is a fair bit of tragic shooting, probably blame Goethe for that. Seems like Isaac Nathan, one of the first people to compose opera in Australia had an opera with prison busts and explosions _Merry Freaks in Troublous Times_ but couldn't find much detail of that.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

KenOC said:


> How about Beethoven, in his late works? "Hey Schindler! I've found an easy way to sound really profound! You just take some diminished seventh chords, like these, and..." The rest is history.


Hehe, Beethoven did of course write terrific pieces, but somehow, I love Haydn's pieces deeply, with Beethoven it's more of a profound respect, but less love.


----------



## dzc4627

I say this only out of lack of emotional or general impact: Nono. Many seem to hold him high on this website but any works of his I have listened to seem to lack any memorable characteristic. Any advice on how to appreciate his music?


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

I say this only out of lack of emotional or general impact: Nono. Many seem to hold him high on this website but any works of his I have listened to seem to lack any memorable characteristic. Any advice on how to appreciate his music?










or










:devil:


----------



## Woodduck

^^^Now what do I drink to _stop_ from laughing?


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Woodduck said:


> ^^^Now what do I drink to _stop_ from laughing?


If I had to guess, you could drink a tequila surmise.


----------



## Autocrat

Woodduck said:


> ^^^Now what do I drink to _stop_ from laughing?











Highly Recommended.


----------



## mcaparula

I love to rile people up! That's what TalkClassical is all about, right? 

I have listened to probably 6 of Puccini's operas complete and I own a recording of La Boheme. Since I come from an Italian background I have heard Tosca a great number of times. Admittedly, I have heard La Fanciulla only once and it was during my college years. In fact, it was studying western music where I formed this opinion. It was a professor of mine who impressed me with this idea of Puccini "selling out," and I happened to agree considering the greatness of Strauss' Elektra, Salome, and Der Rosenkavlier which was written only a few years after Puccini's biggest works.

Also, there have been a number of people who have criticized his work (probably just as many who have praised him) for lacking depth or originality. You can look these up yourselves...My opinion is solely based on the idea that I don't believe Puccini was "forward thinking," taking opera into the next century. That would be Salome. Without Salome, you would not have Moses un Aron and Wozzeck, the two greatest operas of the twentieth century.


----------



## bigshot

I love Puccini's music, I just think his arrangements lack any kind of variety. It's like Andrew Lloyd Weber unison strings. For singers though, Puccini is sublime.


----------



## bigshot

quack said:


> Now i'm wondering if there are any explosions in opera.


The final scene of Gotterdammerung involves a woman and horse jumping into a flaming funeral pyre which bursts into flames and burns down Valhalla, and if that wasn't enough, the Rhine overflows its banks and washes the whole mess away. That beats an explosion any day.


----------



## dzc4627

that was very funny thank you luke.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Then again, I'm sure my appreciation of Beethoven will grow to love quite soon, since I now have all his quartets . Plus, his Trios and Sonatas are amazing as well.


----------



## Cesare Impalatore

mcaparula said:


> It was a professor of mine who impressed me with this idea of Puccini "selling out," and I happened to agree considering the greatness of Strauss' Elektra, Salome, and Der Rosenkavlier which was written only a few years after Puccini's biggest works.


And why exactly would you replace your common sense with the pretentious ideas of some buffoon professor? Yes, Puccini always had critics but they are dead and buried together with their nonesensical theories, while Puccini is still the most performed composer in opera houses all around the world with Verdi and Mozart.

Puccini lacked depth and originality? :lol: Puccini was the most stylistically sovereign, diverse italian composer after Verdi. His works have a range from _giovane scuola_ verism to french romanticism, to influences of wagnerism, all melting together harmonically under Puccini's sense for italian operatic tradition of composing, creating a unique, instantly recognizable style of his own. The criticism of his musical _easiness_ (if you even intend it as something negative) is also put in question by serious modern scholars who put more emphasis on Puccini's harmonics than his melodies. Take the classic melodic aria _Che gelida manina_ for example. It's not just a simple melody, it has multiple layers of melodic progression which form a sweet harmonic whole, this was something highly innovative and unknown at the time. It's just so wrong to think of Puccini as a cheap crowd pleaser, just look at how the _Nessun dorma_ is written into Turandot; musically it leads right into Calaf's confrontation with Ping, Pang, Pong, precisely to prevent it from being the schmaltzy big tenor moment where everyone applauds. By the way, you didn't respond on _In questa reggia_, a soprano aria as sophisticated as it gets.

When it comes to non-musical content of his operas, Puccini is universally credited for his deep characterization of tragic female heroines, which certainly had a permanent influence on society, i.e. the whole fascination for strong female personalities. The diversity of his sceneries is also noteworthy, the asiatic exotism from Butterfly and Turandot, the _bohemian_ France from Bohème, the modern proto-western movie Fanciulla etc. etc., so much for the unoriginality.

Nietzsche in his criticism of Wagner said that the divine comes on tender feet. There is great sophistication in writing music that is apparently so light, yet so eternal that its artistry outlives us all. Only the faux-elitists don't see this. Ironically, the great masters of what you probably think of as complex, innovative music i.e. Ravel, Webern and Schoenberg all admired Puccini.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit

Much of the austro-german music by Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Schubert, Schumann, etc. A few of their works are of spectacular greatness but we act like everything they touched attained a divine status, the fact is that they are human and most of their works do not represent their greatest passion, especially when you write as prolifically as they did.


----------



## GioCar

To those who think that Puccini is overrated (my avatar feels a bit offended...)

I'd suggest to read this book









Julian Budden - Puccini, His Life and Works (2002)

Illuminating.


----------



## Headphone Hermit

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> Much of the austro-german music by Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Schubert, Schumann, etc. A few of their works are of spectacular greatness but we act like everything they touched attained a divine status, the fact is that they are human and most of their works do not represent their greatest passion, especially when you write as prolifically as they did.


Has the clock gone back and it is April 1st again? You *are* joking, surely?


----------



## DiesIraeCX

GioCar said:


> To those who think that Puccini is overrated (my avatar feels a bit offended...)
> 
> I'd suggest to read this book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Julian Budden - Puccini, His Life and Works (2002)
> 
> Illuminating.


Ah, so _that's_ what your avatar pic is!

Earlier, Woodduck suggested _La Fanciulla del West_, what work would you recommend, for anyone interested?


----------



## GioCar

DiesIraeCX said:


> Ah, so _that's_ what your avatar pic is!
> 
> Earlier, Woodduck suggested _La Fanciulla del West_, what work would you recommend, for anyone interested?


Yes, Puccini was very fond of cars (and women...) indeed! 
He was also involved in a very serious car accident that almost killed him.
In my avatar pic he's driving his Clément just before his accident. In spite of this, some years later he crossed Europe by driving his Lancia Trikappa...

Tosca, Madama Butterfly and Turandot are the works by him I like most. Turandot in particular, and I'd say with the 3rd act completed by Luciano Berio (just saw at La Scala).


----------



## Mahlerian

dzc4627 said:


> I say this only out of lack of emotional or general impact: Nono. Many seem to hold him high on this website but any works of his I have listened to seem to lack any memorable characteristic. Any advice on how to appreciate his music?


Nono's late works are subtly colored and complex in timbre. Just let the waves of sound wash over you.


----------



## clavichorder

It hurts me to call any composer overrated, and if I'm being oversensitive, to see others saying they're overrated. Too many cruel generalizations are easily made.


----------



## papsrus

clavichorder said:


> It hurts me to call any composer overrated, and if I'm being oversensitive, to see others saying they're overrated. Too many cruel generalizations are easily made.


I'm of the mind that one should try to take any artist on his or her own terms. Naive, maybe, but aside from something like the plagiarism by the pianist mentioned above, any artist/composer has something to say. Whether an individual can appreciate that message seems to me to be often a matter for the listener, not the composer.

How many compositions which are generally regarded as successful works today were greeted with derision at their premiere? I just read this morning how members of the orchestra that premiered "La Mer" thought it was awful.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit

Headphone Hermit said:


> Has the clock gone back and it is April 1st again? You *are* joking, surely?


No, not at all. They're incredibly over-rated.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> No, not at all. They're incredibly over-rated.


What about French composers? Is most of their output overrated as well?

You've repeatedly said that you're not a fan of the Austro-German composers. Bach/Beethoven/Mozart/Schubert/Brahms/Schumann/etc. and company aren't overrated, it's just that your biases are showing. I'm not a big fan of Ravel, but I wouldn't call him overrated.


----------



## Headphone Hermit

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> No, not at all. They're incredibly over-rated.


Bach ... over-rated?

Beethoven ... over-rated?

Mozart ... over-rated?

.... so, precisely what expertise qualifies *you* to express such an opinion?


----------



## Cesare Impalatore

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> No, not at all. They're incredibly over-rated.


Now you're exaggerating. I could sort of follow the idea of your original post that sometimes there is too much blind, dogmatic worship of composers like Brahms who are treated uncritically as if they were Gods but taking all of the germanic-austrian composers that you named and saying that they're all _incredibly overrated_ in that totality is simply an absurd standpoint.


----------



## Gustav Ilych Shostakovich

Franck, Camille Saint-Saëns, Mendelssohn, Rachmaninoff, BRAHMS.


----------



## Woodduck

Gustav Ilych Shostakovich said:


> Franck, Camille Saint-Saëns, Mendelssohn, Rachmaninoff, BRAHMS.


I wonder why you think these composers are overrated. I've never known anyone to rate Franck very highly outside of a few well-known works. Much of Saint-Saens' music is rarely performed and not all that well-known, and it's so diverse that I suspect he's underrated on the whole. Mendelssohn has been underrated as facile and lacking depth, which can make the actual experience of his music a wonderful surprise. Rachmaninoff was dismissed for a long time as sentimental and "popular" and has finally gotten the esteem he deserves.

The only one of these composers I'd agree about, and only slightly, is Brahms, who would probably have been flattered but also embarrassed to be included in the "three Bs" with Bach and Beethoven. But he remains a master composer, and his best work, concise and powerful, is hard to overpraise.


----------



## Dim7

What's Brahms' best work?


----------



## Guest

Dim7 said:


> What's Brahms' best work?


I love every symphony he ever penned, especially numbers 1 to 4.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I have not yet heard a piece of music by Brahms that I didn't like. Like dogen, I am enthusiastic about the first and fourth symphonies. But one must not also forget the second, third...concertos, other orchestral pieces....chamber music....songs....choral music and piano music. Wow, they are actually all amazing pieces of music.


----------



## Woodduck

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I have not yet heard a piece of music by Brahms that I didn't like. Like dogen, I am enthusiastic about the first and fourth symphonies. But one must not also forget the second, third...concertos, other orchestral pieces....chamber music....songs....choral music and piano music. Wow, they are actually all amazing pieces of music.


Brahms was hard on himself, so very little not up to his standards escaped the fireplace. Among all his superb works, I love best the chamber music in which strings are combined with something else: the violin, clarinet and cello sonatas, the piano trios, quartets and quintet, the clarinet trio, and the clarinet quintet. Much of it strikes me as being equal to any chamber music ever written by anyone.


----------



## Dim7

Ah now I get it, you weren't talking about any single work, but the best portion of his oeuvre? Silly me.


----------



## Woodduck

Dim7 said:


> Ah now I get it, you weren't talking about any single work, but the best portion of his oeuvre? Silly me.


Hmmm... A great idea for a poll. "What's the greatest single work of Brahms. What's the greatest movement in it? What's the most underrated moment in that movement? What kind of a schmuck doesn't know the answers to these questions?"


----------



## Vesteralen

Another thread that's just an excuse for people to vent their frustration over the fact that other people like music they don't like.

Will it never end?


----------



## Robert Eckert

Well there are exceptions


----------



## Arsakes

Robert Eckert said:


> View attachment 82286
> 
> 
> Well there are exceptions


----------



## Robert Eckert

Arsakes said:


>


Exactly...A horrid batch of air pudding. And he plays sharp, as a topping.
Should have called it "Mawkish". A very difficult piece to listen to, without losing your last meal.


----------



## Klassic

"Most overrated music?"

_My answer here has to do with overrated historical significant_. Without a doubt,

Beethoven Symphony No.3 
Beethoven Symphony No.9 
Mahler 2nd Symphony 
Mozart Requiem 
and
Bach Saint Matthews Passion,

all of them, WAY overrated!


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

Dim7 said:


> What's Brahms' best work?


Die schöne Magelone, in my view.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Klassic said:


> "Most overrated music?"
> 
> _My answer here has to do with overrated historical significant_. Without a doubt,
> 
> Beethoven Symphony No.3
> Beethoven Symphony No.9


Historically, neither of these are even close to overrated, especially the Ninth symphony. One need only look at the effect/influence it had on Wagner.


----------



## Woodduck

DiesIraeCX said:


> Historically, neither of these are even close to overrated, especially the Ninth symphony. One need only look at the effect/influence it had on Wagner.


Also read Berlioz on Beethoven, and the "Eroica" in particular.

Has anyone considered that work's effect on Beethoven's own subsequent work? Artists influence themselves first of all, and every breakthrough makes further ones possible.


----------



## Bruckner Anton

Klassic said:


> "Most overrated music?"
> 
> _My answer here has to do with overrated historical significant_. Without a doubt,
> 
> Beethoven Symphony No.3
> Beethoven Symphony No.9
> Mahler 2nd Symphony
> Mozart Requiem
> and
> Bach Saint Matthews Passion,
> 
> all of them, WAY overrated!


Beethoven's third is probably one of the biggest breakthrough in the history of symphony in the following ways:
1. It greatly improved the function and structure of sonata-allegro form in a symphony.
1.1 the use of multiple related themes in the exposition.
1.2 the introduce of a new theme in the development section (based on its context), then restated it in the recapitulation.
1.3 the fully developed development section provides far more information than earlier symphonies.
1.3 the expansion of coda. In his works, the coda can be a second development section.

2. It expand the use of dissonant harmonic language: such as tritone, which was considered "wrong" from 18-centry point of view. And also the way it treats the first phrase of theme one in the exposition.

3. Forward-looking compositional techniques: such as Hemiola used in theme one phrase three in the exposition, and also used in the development section after a energetic fugato. It substantially enhanced the expression of the sense of tension and struggle.

4. Expanded orchestration and part writing: for example, the bass takes a key role in the work, far more weight and importance than earlier symphonies. While pre-Beethoven composer nearly always let the bass double the cello, Beethoven frequently treat them seperately.

5. Far expanded slow movement. Needless to explain.

Of course other improvement is witnessed, such as improvement on scherzo, the combination of variation and fugue form in the finale. I just named a few.


----------



## jpar3

KenOC said:


> If I see the word "underrated" around here again, I swear I'm gonna puke my toes right out through my glottis! So instead I ask, Which works in the canon are the most _overrated_, stealing mindshare and earshare from far more deserving music?
> 
> If nothing else, a chance for a therapeutic rant.
> 
> (No doubt a repeat thread, but so be it.)


Schubert's 'Great' Symphony. Most of CPE Bach. Ravel.


----------



## Richard8655

jpar3 said:


> Schubert's 'Great' Symphony. Most of CPE Bach. Ravel.


Oh come on, CPE Bach overrated? I think his works are excellent. Like all the Bach boys - CPE, WF, JC, and JCF. (Except PDQ)


----------



## Harold in Columbia

Klassic said:


> _My answer here has to do with overrated historical significant_. Without a doubt,
> 
> Beethoven Symphony No.3
> Beethoven Symphony No.9
> Mahler 2nd Symphony
> Mozart Requiem
> and
> Bach Saint Matthews Passion,
> 
> all of them, WAY overrated!


Maybe correct in case of Be 3.

Probably correct in case of Mo req.

Probably incorrect in cases of Ma 2 and Ba St. M - indeed not especially influential, but nobody says they are.

Even more probably incorrect in case of Be 9, which is maybe the single most influential thing Beethoven ever wrote, confirming the new conception of the symphony that the previous works, even 5, maybe only hinted at/anticipated. (Rosen thought its productive influence began only with Brahms and late Wagner, but I hear the adagio already in the love scene from Berlioz's _Romeo and Juliet_ - 



.)



Bruckner Anton said:


> Beethoven's third is probably one of the biggest breakthrough in the history of symphony in the following ways...
> 
> 1.1 the use of multiple related themes in the exposition.
> 1.2 the introduce of a new theme in the development section (based on its context), then restated it in the recapitulation...


Man, if more people ever start to actually listen to Haydn again, Beethoven's gonna be in _trouble_.


----------



## Harold in Columbia

Woodduck said:


> Has anyone considered that work's [the _Eroica_ effect on Beethoven's own subsequent work? Artists influence themselves first of all, and every breakthrough makes further ones possible.


This is, in this case, maybe backwards. Beethoven's subsequent work - maybe particularly symphony 9 - influences how we perceive his earlier work.


----------

