# Top 5 Requiems?



## emiellucifuge

I know that there are hundreds out there, unfortunately I know of very little so my list will probably be generic. I would still like to see some good requiems that I dont know yet.

1. Mozart
2. Brahms
3. Verdi
4. Dvorak
5. Berlioz


----------



## Weston

Is the Brahms really a Requiem? Ah well - who cares? It's great.

For me in no particular order:

Brahms
Ligeti
Durufle
Faure
okay - I admit, Mozart too.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Yes it is, hes just chosen the german translation


----------



## andruini

1. Fauré
2. Brahms
3. Mozart
4. Ligeti
5. Berlioz


----------



## ConcertVienna

when you say Requiem, you just think of Mozart!


----------



## kg4fxg

*Requiem*

Verdi
Mozart
Britten
Brahms (In the mother tongue) German of course.

These are all I have, but I would as always be interested to explore more. Probably Mozart and Verdi are my favorites.


----------



## Mirror Image

Easy one:

1. Berlioz
2. Faure
3. Brahms
4. Durufle
5. Britten


----------



## Mirror Image

Weston said:


> Is the Brahms really a Requiem? Ah well - who cares? It's great.


It may not be a "requiem" in the traditional sense, but yes, it is one.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

1. Mozart
2. Faure
3. Brahms
4. Verdi
5. Benjamin Britten (War Requiem)


----------



## tenor02

1. Brahms
2. Rutter (if you havnt...you need to).
3. Mozart
4. Faure
5. Durufle/Britten


----------



## emiellucifuge

tenor02 said:


> 1. Brahms
> 2. Rutter (if you havnt...you need to).
> 3. Mozart
> 4. Faure
> 5. Durufle/Britten


I have!

My music teacher has met the man


----------



## Sorin Eushayson

Easy.

*1. WOLFGANG AMADEUS MOZART* 

2. Luigi Cherubini - C Minor
3. Luigi Cherubini - D Minor
4. Michael Haydn - C Minor
5. Brahms (Yes, the German one!)

Also of note are Palestrina and Ockeghem's Missa pro Defunctis', the latter's being the first setting of its kind. I would also like to take a moment to mourn the Requiem that Beethoven never wrote...


----------



## Polednice

Mirror Image said:


> It may not be a "requiem" in the traditional sense, but yes, it is one.


Considering Brahms et. al., depending on our definitions, something like Verdi's _Requiem_ isn't a requiem in the 'traditional sense', both for his atheism and because he wrote it at a time when the requiem had moved away from being a piece to actually serve its religious purpose to something that was more intended as a concert item. So language shouldn't really be a defining factor.

Anyway, I don't possess much choral music, so I'm too uninformed to answer this question properly, but, of the ones I own, I'd put them in the order:

Brahms
Verdi
Dvorak
Mozart


----------



## Conor71

I only know 3! :

Brahms
Fauré
Mozart


----------



## emiellucifuge

Well you two I recommend listening to some of the others mentioned.


----------



## Art Rock

1. Brahms
2. Faure
3. Mozart
4. Britten
5. Verdi


----------



## Lukecash12

1. Schnittke
2. Verdi
3. Sammartini
4. Bach
5. Franck


----------



## emiellucifuge

Sammartini? Going to have to look into that one.


----------



## nickgray

In no part. order:

Dvorak
Faure
Berlioz
Mozart
Schnittke


----------



## Artemis

I once went through a phase of being quite keen on Requiems. Perhaps rather sadly I have lost interest now and seldom play them.

I collected most of the well-known ones but in all honesty only really liked two: Mozart and Brahms. I found most of the others over-dramatic (Berlioz and Verdi) or over-slushy (Faure). 

One other came up quite close behind and that was one by Michael Haydn, Requiem pro defuncto Archiepiscopo Sigismundo (MH154). I gather that Mozart's was partly modelled on this work. What I especially liked about it was that it is (a) Classical, (b) straightforward liturgically, as opposed to many others which are little more than concert pieces, and have some ghastly additions that don't interest me one tiny bit. 

It so happens that Schubert was a big admirer of Michael Haydn and when I began to delve further into the latter's works I could see why.


----------



## Lukecash12

emiellucifuge said:


> Sammartini? Going to have to look into that one.


You won't regret it. Some of the best Renaissance/Baroque transitional composing.

And I might add that Schumann's Requiem is great too.


----------



## SamGuss

I have very little choral work, though my appreciation and enjoyment of them have grown over the last year or so. To date though, I have to admit to only listening to Mozart's Requiem, though one of my goals for classical music this year is to hear the other "greats". On my hit list is Brahms, Fuarve, Verdi and Bernstein.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant

The Requiem of Ockeghem (c1410-1497) is the earliest surviving Requiem, though it can hardly be the first, it is so great.

And the Victoria Requiem (1603) is a great work.


----------



## tenor02

new and revised list:

1. Brahms
2. Mozart
3. Durufle
4. Rutter
5. Faure


----------



## Rondo

1) Mozart
2) Verdi - a while back I would not have mentioned this one, until I stumbled upon Barenboim/CSO recording which "enlightened" me
3) Fauré
4) Brahms

And, Beethoven's requiem remains the single largest void in all of music to this day.


----------



## Johnny

What's a requiem?


----------



## TresPicos

Johnny said:


> What's a requiem?


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=requiem


----------



## Johnny

It's so complicated you couldn't just explain it in a sentence or two?


----------



## David58117

Johnny said:


> It's so complicated you couldn't just explain it in a sentence or two?


Sometimes you have to take the initiative and do a little learning on your own. Instead of the 13 hours or so spent on asking and waiting for a reply, you could of simply looked it up yourself and got your answer.


----------



## Johnny

Either of your two replies would have surely been shorter if they had just answered my question. 

Instead of me having to trudge through a few hundred words of an unclear wiki article, couldn't one of the people who apparently know what a requiem is, just tell me? 

Or is it actually so complex as to be unexplainable in less than a few sentences?


----------



## emiellucifuge

It is basically a musical setting of the catholic requiem mass, though in the last century requiems have been written with other texts. A mass for the dead basically.


----------



## David58117

Johnny said:


> Either of your two replies would have surely been shorter if they had just answered my question.
> 
> Instead of me having to trudge through a few hundred words of an unclear wiki article, couldn't one of the people who apparently know what a requiem is, just tell me?
> 
> Or is it actually so complex as to be unexplainable in less than a few sentences?


Good grief! What a sense of entitlement...

"No, *I* shouldn't have to spend time looking it up! Slaveboy! Spend your time telling me what it means! Me too important to look through a wikipedia article!"


----------



## Johnny

I didn't insist anyone tell me.

I was responding to the two of ye who responded by telling me to look it up. Couldn't either of ye just answered my question? Or said nothing?

You should really make some sort of notice that questions are not to be asked on this board. - Because people could always do their own research. Add it along with the "people who dislike anything are not openminded". 

*emiellucifuge*, thanks.


----------



## thatperson

1. Mozart
2. Ligeti
3. Verdi
4. Britten
5. Berlioz


----------



## Guest

Johnny said:


> I didn't insist anyone tell me.
> 
> I was responding to the two of ye who responded by telling me to look it up. Couldn't either of ye just answered my question? Or said nothing?
> 
> You should really make some sort of notice that questions are not to be asked on this board. - Because people could always do their own research. Add it along with the "people who dislike anything are not openminded".
> 
> *emiellucifuge*, thanks.


You do have this pattern, though, of asking questions, then getting upset when the answer isn't spoon-fed to you without any effort on your part.


----------



## David58117

DrMike said:


> You do have this pattern, though, of asking questions, then getting upset when the answer isn't spoon-fed to you without any effort on your part.


Yep! And then you (Johnny) have this ungrateful attitude and rude way of replying. I don't mind answering questions (In fact I've told you in other posts - if you have any questions, just ask us!) but a lot of your posts are just rude, which is really off putting.

I'm not trying to be insulting, just bringing something to your attention if you're not aware of it...


----------



## Johnny

Did you consider "What's a requiem?" to be rude? If so, I really think you need to increase your theshold.

And I'm not ungrateful. I've thanked people who've answered me.


----------



## Guest

Johnny said:


> *It's so complicated you couldn't just explain it in a sentence or two?*





Johnny said:


> *Either of your two replies would have surely been shorter if they had just answered my question.
> 
> Instead of me having to trudge through a few hundred words of an unclear wiki article, couldn't one of the people who apparently know what a requiem is, just tell me?*
> 
> Or is it actually so complex as to be unexplainable in less than a few sentences?





Johnny said:


> Did you consider "What's a requiem?" to be rude? If so, I really think you need to increase your theshold.
> 
> And I'm not ungrateful. I've thanked people who've answered me.


"What's a requiem?" was not a rude question. Your responses, which I have quoted above, were rude. Someone took the time to find a website and link to it so you could learn what a requiem is. And you just blow it off, because they didn't spoon feed the answer to you.


----------



## Johnny

They weren't rude. And the link links to google. Get over yourself. I didn't insist anyone answer me, but you can hardly expect me to thank someone for replying with a link to google. My point was, if they are making the effort of actually typing a post, why couldn't they just answer the question? Or just ignore it altogether. No one forced them to respond. It was a harmless initial question, that was in no way "rude". Shudder the thought somebody would ask what a requiem is on a music forum! Amongst a group of people who are discussing requiems!

There are quite a few people on this forum who really need to get their heads out of their asses.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

I thought I shall mention a little known requiem by Michael Haydn (brother of Joseph Haydn), _Requiem in C minor_ (1771). The only recording available is played by _The King's Consort_ under Robert King on the Hyperion label.

It may not be as great as your favourite requiem by Mozart or Brahms or whoever else, but I think it's worth a try.

Samples below:-

http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/al.asp?al=CDA67510


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

Johnny said:


> They weren't rude. And the link links to google. Get over yourself. I didn't insist anyone answer me, but you can hardly expect me to thank someone for replying with a link to google. My point was, if they are making the effort of actually typing a post, why couldn't they just answer the question? Or just ignore it altogether. No one forced them to respond. It was a harmless initial question, that was in no way "rude". Shudder the thought somebody would ask what a requiem is on a music forum! Amongst a group of people who are discussing requiems!
> 
> There are quite a few people on this forum who really need to get their heads out of their asses.


Chill out. Calm down. Put on Mozart's requiem. Let us know which version you try because there are many recordings around and many attempts to "complete" it. (In case if you didn't know, this piece was left incomplete by Mozart literally just before he died).


----------



## Guest

Johnny said:


> They weren't rude. And the link links to google. Get over yourself. I didn't insist anyone answer me, but you can hardly expect me to thank someone for replying with a link to google. My point was, if they are making the effort of actually typing a post, why couldn't they just answer the question? Or just ignore it altogether. No one forced them to respond. It was a harmless initial question, that was in no way "rude". Shudder the thought somebody would ask what a requiem is on a music forum! Amongst a group of people who are discussing requiems!
> 
> There are quite a few people on this forum who really need to get their heads out of their asses.


If you didn't like the responses, why didn't you just ignore them altogether? No one forced you to click on the link and read it. You could have just waited until someone gave you an answer you liked. Or - heaven forbid - go look it up yourself. In a different thread regarding musical periods, several of us took the time to explain how they have been defined, and in spite of that, you still rejected the explanation. So why not just go look it up yourself? Or, in the spirit of the other thread, maybe you will think that any definition of a requiem is rather arbitrary, and that maybe you could pool together a group of choral works and come up with your own definition of a requiem.


----------



## David58117

Johnny said:


> They weren't rude. And the link links to google. Get over yourself. I didn't insist anyone answer me, but you can hardly expect me to thank someone for replying with a link to google. My point was, if they are making the effort of actually typing a post, why couldn't they just answer the question? Or just ignore it altogether. No one forced them to respond. It was a harmless initial question, that was in no way "rude". Shudder the thought somebody would ask what a requiem is on a music forum! Amongst a group of people who are discussing requiems!
> 
> There are quite a few people on this forum who really need to get their heads out of their asses.


You're not listening. As said already, it wasn't the initial question that was "rude" - it was how you (in this and many other posts) *rudely reply.*

I would of been more than happy to assist if you didn't reply with your usual sense of entitlement - "Instead of *me *having to trudge through a few hundred words of an unclear wiki article,..."

Based on your history, what happens next is you reject the definition, ask someone what something painfully clear "means" and then take some pot shot at them while doing it. Oh, then there's a call for members just reading it to jump in and back you up, because *obviously* the other person is *completely* wrong, and you're right.

To reiterate - asking what a requiem is - perfectly fine! Having a history of being rude, and taking pot shots at members...not so much.

Again - I don't mean to be rude. However, it's as if you're living in a warzone and have tons of aggression that gets taken out on here, I don't know if you're aware of it, but you would be better off if you calm down. Think of how you come off to other people...asking how periods are defined, ignoring the definitions given, and insisting that everyone responding was wrong and that you (being new to classical music) had it right , wasn't a very good introduction.

Regardless, you got the short definition of what a requiem is. Do yourself a favor and look the rest of it up.


----------



## Guest

Back on topic:
After seeing Faure's Requiem on several people's top 5 lists, I decided to finally give it a listen. I purchased the recording by Rutter and the Cambridge Singers (Collegium) on iTunes, after reading up on a few different versions - I had no idea that finding a good version of this piece was so convoluted - which version, full orchestra or not, etc. I settled on Rutter taking it at face value that this is the original version that Faure intended. If I enjoy it, I may explore the full orchestra version (I read good things about Herreweghe's full orchestra version). I am enjoying it thus far. A much smaller scale piece, more on the lines of a renaissance requiem than a classical or romantic period requiem. Very peaceful, less ominous than some of my other favorites (Brahms, Mozart). 

I saw on another thread a recommendation for the Dutoit recording on Decca, but I thought I would poll on here what the preferred recordings were, both for the smaller scale versions (like Rutter) and the full orchestra versions. I am inclined to lean towards Herreweghe, as I have come to really enjoy his recordings of Bach's choral works, but am not opposed to those who go with modern instruments and performance practices.


----------



## Grosse Fugue

Johnny said:


> Either of your two replies would have surely been shorter if they had just answered my question.
> 
> Instead of me having to trudge through a few hundred words of an unclear wiki article, couldn't one of the people who apparently know what a requiem is, just tell me?
> 
> Or is it actually so complex as to be unexplainable in less than a few sentences?


Mass about death.


----------



## Mordacis

in no particular order

Alfred Schnittke
Mozart
Ligeti
Verdi
Fauré


----------



## TWhite

Okay, as a Catholic, I feel that I have to come into this subject with a certain intrinsic 'feel' of what a Requiem does or does not mean for me. Let's just say that the musical form itself brings up certain and inevitable emotions that I'm going to have to face in the near future and leave it at that. 

The current practice in the Church since Vatican II is to either downplay or eliminate altogether the "Dies Irae" (Day of Judgement) section of the Requiem Mass, which makes a lot of us breathe a little easier. 

Faure beat them to it by about 60 years with his very personal, and I think largely very satisfying Requiem. It's extremely beautiful--somewhat meandering at times--but portions of it actually sound as if what I hope Heaven just might be. 

However, for sheer dramatic intensity, I cannot think of any Requiem Mass that comes close to the Verdi. Even Wagner referred to it as "Verdi's greatest Opera." For me--and this is strictly a PERSONAL opinion, mind you--it's just absolutely overpowering. If nothing else, the "Sanctus" and the "Libera Me" sections simply slam me against the wall. And of course, the music is typical Verdi--remarkably dramatic and beautiful. 

I can't really speak for the Mozart Requiem, because so much of it was left in sketches and finished by from what I understand, several other composers. I run hot and cold on it. Some of it is remarkable, some of it seems to me to be just counting time. But then again, this is strictly a personal opinion. 

The Brahms "Ein Deutches Requiem" is absolutely beautiful, and as I have said in another post, it's one of the great choral works of the Romantic Era that leaves me totally at peace with both myself and the world both during and after a performance. I just love it. 

I suppose though, that when it comes down to it, I'm not really that comfortable with "Requiems." But the ones I've listed are the ones that I think have the most musical value. And let's face it, they WERE written more for concert performances than in a church. 

Tom


----------



## Bas

emiellucifuge said:


> Yes it is, hes just chosen the german translation


That is not true, if you say a Requiem is a piece of music to honor someone that have died, Brahms' does qualify for a requiem. However it is not a Requiem in the traditional sense of the word, being a Catholic Roman mass, sung in Latin with the text we all know (Lux perpetua, Kyrie, Dies Irae, and so on). Brahms broke with the traditional Roman Requiem tradition and chose to work with texts he found in the whole Lutherian Bible.

Nevertheless, the work itself is brilliant, I agree on that.


----------



## Prodromides

In gathering my favorite 5 Requiems, I've noticed that they range from the early 1960s through the early 1980s:

1. Renaud Gagneux's 1982 REQUIEM for 2 Sopranos, Orchestra & Chorus
2. Gyorgy Ligeti's 1965 REQUIEM for Soprano, Mezzo-soprano, Choir & Orchestra
3. Andrew Imbrie's 1984 REQUIEM for Soprano, Singers & Symphony
4. Vagn Holmboe's REQUIEM FOR NIETZSCHE (1963-'64) for Tenor, Baritone, Orchestra & Choir
5. REQUIEM Opus 39 for Baritone, String Quartet, Orchestra & Chorus by Wilfred Josephs (1963)


There's also Requiems composed for different non-vocal instrumentations which would challenge TC's forum classifications, such as Rautavaara's Requiem for brass ensemble or Takemitsu's Requiem for strings.
We could chat about a few Requiems in the string section.


----------



## Very Senior Member

Bas said:


> That is not true, if you say a Requiem is a piece of music to honor someone that have died, Brahms' does qualify for a requiem. However it is not a Requiem in the traditional sense of the word, being a Catholic Roman mass, sung in Latin with the text we all know (Lux perpetua, Kyrie, Dies Irae, and so on). Brahms broke with the traditional Roman Requiem tradition and chose to work with texts he found in the whole Lutherian Bible.
> 
> Nevertheless, the work itself is brilliant, I agree on that.


Brahms Requiem is not a piece of music to honour someone who has died. It differs from R.C Requiems not just in the language in which it was written (German) and the source material (Lutheran Bible), but more fundamentally in that R.C. Requiems are written for the benefit of the dead whilst Brahms Requiem is written to comfort the living upon the occasion of someone's death.

In the R.C. Church the doctrine is that deceased people can be assisted in the after-life by prayers and deeds offered by those still living. In most Protestant Churches, once you're dead you're dead and in God's care only, with nothing more that can be done to help the "souls departed" by the actions of those still living, e.g by offering prayers or Masses etc.

Consistent with this distinction, Brahms Requiem starts with an extract from the Beatitudes: "Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted." Although written using text from the Lutheran Bible, it is not exclusively for use among Christians but has wider appeal among humanists as well. It is of course a nice piece of music with an appeal outside any religious connotations at all.


----------



## Bas

Very Senior Member said:


> Brahms Requiem is not a piece of music to honour someone who has died. It differs from R.C Requiems not just in the language in which it was written (German) and the source material (Lutheran Bible), but more fundamentally in that R.C. Requiems are written for the benefit of the dead whilst Brahms Requiem is written to comfort the living upon the occasion of someone's death.
> 
> In the R.C. Church the doctrine is that deceased people can be assisted in the after-life by prayers and deeds offered by those still living. In most Protestant Churches, once you're dead you're dead and in God's care only, with nothing more that can be done to help the "souls departed" by the actions of those still living, e.g by offering prayers or Masses etc.
> 
> Consistent with this distinction, Brahms Requiem starts with an extract from the Beatitudes: "Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted." Although written using text from the Lutheran Bible, it is not exclusively for use among Christians but has wider appeal among humanists as well. It is of course a nice piece of music with an appeal outside any religious connotations at all.


Thank you for this enlightenment. I should have studied the text better, I assume.


----------



## Vaneyes

Mordacis said:


> in no particular order
> 
> Alfred Schnittke
> Mozart
> Ligeti
> Verdi
> Fauré


My work made easy, thank you. Ditto!


----------



## Il_Penseroso

No order of preference:
Mozart 
Berlioz 
Brahms
Faure
Britten


----------



## Nadia

1. Faure










2.Verdi
3.Saint-Saens
4.-
5.-


----------



## Ramako

Too ignorant to have a top 5 list, but I'll put a top 3

1. Mozart
2. Victoria
3. Verdi


----------



## Renaissance

1. Mozart
2. Faure
3. Brahms
4. Cherubini
5. Dvorak


----------



## Morgante

1. Mozart
2.
3.
4.
5.


----------



## Machiavel

1. Berlioz


2.Mozart

3.Fauré
4.Brahms
5.Verdi


----------



## Bas

1. Victoria
2. Mozart



3. Faure
4. Durufle
5. CPE Bach


----------



## cjvinthechair

Prodromides said:


> In gathering my favorite 5 Requiems, I've noticed that they range from the early 1960s through the early 1980s:
> 
> 1. Renaud Gagneux's 1982 REQUIEM for 2 Sopranos, Orchestra & Chorus
> 2. Gyorgy Ligeti's 1965 REQUIEM for Soprano, Mezzo-soprano, Choir & Orchestra
> 3. Andrew Imbrie's 1984 REQUIEM for Soprano, Singers & Symphony
> 4. Vagn Holmboe's REQUIEM FOR NIETZSCHE (1963-'64) for Tenor, Baritone, Orchestra & Choir
> 5. REQUIEM Opus 39 for Baritone, String Quartet, Orchestra & Chorus by Wilfred Josephs (1963)
> 
> There's also Requiems composed for different non-vocal instrumentations which would challenge TC's forum classifications, such as Rautavaara's Requiem for brass ensemble or Takemitsu's Requiem for strings.
> We could chat about a few Requiems in the string section.


Despite the entirely justified claims of Mozart, Brahms, Faure etc. it's lovely to see someone proposing something substantially different, not least as there are a couple there I need to discover !
Can I add 5 more, which I've thoroughly enjoyed...best of all time - well, possibly not, but memorable to me at least:
Carl Rutti (Sui)
Asger Hamerik(Nor)
Cyrillus Kreek(Est)
Peter Benoit(Bel)
Thierry Lancino(Fra)


----------



## Xaltotun

1. Berlioz
2. Mozart
3. Victoria
4. Brahms


----------



## Lukecash12

Very Senior Member said:


> Brahms Requiem is not a piece of music to honour someone who has died. It differs from R.C Requiems not just in the language in which it was written (German) and the source material (Lutheran Bible), but more fundamentally in that R.C. Requiems are written for the benefit of the dead whilst Brahms Requiem is written to comfort the living upon the occasion of someone's death.
> 
> In the R.C. Church the doctrine is that deceased people can be assisted in the after-life by prayers and deeds offered by those still living. In most Protestant Churches, once you're dead you're dead and in God's care only, with nothing more that can be done to help the "souls departed" by the actions of those still living, e.g by offering prayers or Masses etc.
> 
> Consistent with this distinction, Brahms Requiem starts with an extract from the Beatitudes: "Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted." Although written using text from the Lutheran Bible, it is not exclusively for use among Christians but has wider appeal among humanists as well. *It is of course a nice piece of music with an appeal outside any religious connotations at all.*


I am interested in this emboldened portion, because it occurs to me that oftentimes people who discuss classical music prefer to downplay religion in music. While I understand that not all people are religious or have the same religious inclinations as those who have composed religious works, I have to say that my religious standpoint is one of the primary reasons that I enjoy religious music. Actually, it's probably *the* primary reason. There certainly is a lot of musical value in masses, credos, etc., but I honestly don't think there is any way for someone who isn't committed to Christianity to really understand those Christian works. If in your world Christ didn't prostrate Himself unto dishonorable treatment and death, and did it for you, than there is no way for you to get Bach's Passion accounts like a Christian. The whole point of such music isn't just to observe religious institutions, while you fancy the notes of the composition. The point is for the listener to resoundingly agree with (or at least in heart) and dwell in the thought of the text. Unlike a lot of other music out there, this type of music absolutely hangs on the text. There is nothing else that it is trying to express, so if the text doesn't sit right with you, it's impossible for you to get it.

Of course, I mean no offense.


----------



## moody

ConcertVienna said:


> when you say Requiem, you just think of Mozart!


I think of Verdi.


----------



## moody

Lukecash12 said:


> I am interested in this emboldened portion, because it occurs to me that oftentimes people who discuss classical music prefer to downplay religion in music. While I understand that not all people are religious or have the same religious inclinations as those who have composed religious works, I have to say that my religious standpoint is one of the primary reasons that I enjoy religious music. Actually, it's probably *the* primary reason. There certainly is a lot of musical value in masses, credos, etc., but I honestly don't think there is any way for someone who isn't committed to Christianity to really understand those Christian works. If in your world Christ didn't prostrate Himself unto dishonorable treatment and death, and did it for you, than there is no way for you to get Bach's Passion accounts like a Christian. The whole point of such music isn't just to observe religious institutions, while you fancy the notes of the composition. The point is for the listener to resoundingly agree with (or at least in heart) and dwell in the thought of the text. Unlike a lot of other music out there, this type of music absolutely hangs on the text. There is nothing else that it is trying to express, so if the text doesn't sit right with you, it's impossible for you to get it.
> 
> Of course, I mean no offense.


I most certainly do not believe in religion but can appreciate that probably the composer did and the people it was aimed at did. But I can't understand why you think that I can't appreciate all that you mention but as an observer,that is a very sanctimonious attitude.


----------



## Delicious Manager

I always think how ironic it is how popular Mozart's Requiem has become since Amadeus, given how little of it he wrote. For this reason, I have to discount this composite composition. My five in no particular order:

Britten - War Requiem
Cherubini - Requiem in C minor
Fauré - Requiem
Holmboe - Requiem for Nietzsche
Verdi - Requiem

The Brahms _Deutsches Requiem_ almost makes me cry with boredom.


----------



## Xaltotun

Lukecash12 said:


> I am interested in this emboldened portion, because it occurs to me that oftentimes people who discuss classical music prefer to downplay religion in music. While I understand that not all people are religious or have the same religious inclinations as those who have composed religious works, I have to say that my religious standpoint is one of the primary reasons that I enjoy religious music. Actually, it's probably *the* primary reason. There certainly is a lot of musical value in masses, credos, etc., but I honestly don't think there is any way for someone who isn't committed to Christianity to really understand those Christian works. If in your world Christ didn't prostrate Himself unto dishonorable treatment and death, and did it for you, than there is no way for you to get Bach's Passion accounts like a Christian. The whole point of such music isn't just to observe religious institutions, while you fancy the notes of the composition. The point is for the listener to resoundingly agree with (or at least in heart) and dwell in the thought of the text. Unlike a lot of other music out there, this type of music absolutely hangs on the text. There is nothing else that it is trying to express, so if the text doesn't sit right with you, it's impossible for you to get it.
> 
> Of course, I mean no offense.


You're right in a way, it would be silly to watch an opera without caring for the libretto, right? But a non-Christian can be a Christian for the duration of the mass... that's what great art does to people. Also, there can linger a desire, or an uncertainty, even when there's no final, formal allegiance... like Pasolini said of himself: "I am an unbeliever... but I have a great nostalghia for belief".


----------



## Delicious Manager

Lukecash12 said:


> I am interested in this emboldened portion, because it occurs to me that oftentimes people who discuss classical music prefer to downplay religion in music. While I understand that not all people are religious or have the same religious inclinations as those who have composed religious works, I have to say that my religious standpoint is one of the primary reasons that I enjoy religious music. Actually, it's probably *the* primary reason. There certainly is a lot of musical value in masses, credos, etc., but I honestly don't think there is any way for someone who isn't committed to Christianity to really understand those Christian works. If in your world Christ didn't prostrate Himself unto dishonorable treatment and death, and did it for you, than there is no way for you to get Bach's Passion accounts like a Christian. The whole point of such music isn't just to observe religious institutions, while you fancy the notes of the composition. The point is for the listener to resoundingly agree with (or at least in heart) and dwell in the thought of the text. Unlike a lot of other music out there, this type of music absolutely hangs on the text. There is nothing else that it is trying to express, so if the text doesn't sit right with you, it's impossible for you to get it.
> 
> Of course, I mean no offense.


For me, the bible is just as much a work of fiction as any opera libretto. I can enjoy opera knowing the plot and libretto are often ridiculous and nonsensical - it doesn't reduce my enjoyment of the work as a whole. Similarly, my enjoyment of the great sacred works of music are not reduced in my total non-belief in the religion being celebrated. Ironically, there are plenty of great scared choral works written by agnostic and atheist composers. What do you make of that?


----------



## Lukecash12

Delicious Manager said:


> For me, the bible is just as much a work of fiction as any opera libretto. I can enjoy opera knowing the plot and libretto are often ridiculous and nonsensical - it doesn't reduce my enjoyment of the work as a whole. Similarly, my enjoyment of the great sacred works of music are not reduced in my total non-belief in the religion being celebrated. Ironically, there are plenty of great scared choral works written by agnostic and atheist composers. What do you make of that?


I make of it that they wanted to be successful like their peers who wrote such works. And it's a bummer that I can't share in the sentiment of the composer, then.


----------



## Delicious Manager

Lukecash12 said:


> I make of it that they wanted to be successful like their peers who wrote such works. And it's a bummer that I can't share in the sentiment of the composer, then.


Among agnostic and atheist composers who wrote sacred requiems, there are:

Berlioz
Brahms
Mozart (yes!)
Schumann
Verdi


----------



## tdc

Delicious Manager said:


> I always think how ironic it is how popular Mozart's Requiem has become since Amadeus, given how little of it he wrote.


This is debatable I think - "_ It cannot be shown to what extent Süssmayr may have depended on now lost "scraps of paper" for the remainder..._"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requiem_(Mozart)

Also I think the Introit, Kyrie, Dies Irie (and part of Lacrimosa) are masterfully written works that shouldn't be 'thrown out with the bath water' so to speak.



Delicious Manager said:


> The Brahms _Deutsches Requiem_ almost makes me cry with boredom.




Well, Brahms' Requiem is my favorite followed by Britten's and Mozart's.


----------



## principe

As I have claimed in another relevant thread, Mozart's Requiem is the most balanced, perfectly written in all the musical lines from the actually melodic to even the bass ones. Every aspect of the composition (form, structure, orchestration, balance among the movements, the singing treatment of every single line and some more) make it The (musical) Requiem. 
I listen and I am involved in this Music for more than three decades and Mozart's Requiem has ever been the Reference one as the Mass in b minor by Bach is for the Masses. If the film "Amadeus" brought it closer to the Grand Public, it does not add or reduce anything as for the appreciation the work has always enjoyed in the professional world of people involved in Classical Music. For the popularity of it, yes the film may have played a certain role. (So, ConcertVienna, I fully agree with you: when you say Requiem...).
Verdi's Requiem, which seems to be a popular one in this forum, is an off the mark, over the top, almost totally operatic work. Impressive indeed, emotionally and sonically very powerful, the orchestration is more than excessive even if it is welcome (because of the creative writing), the length is beyond any proportion and, at the end of the day, audiences do not know whether they have to be excited for the "show" or deeply moved on account of the serious and solemn issue of a Mass for the Dead!(?).
Brahms' Ein Deutsches Requiem is, as the title clearly implies, a very German work. Brahms cared mostly about the form and the structure than to excite the audience. Whether a believer or not, he wished to serve the purpose and he did it marvelously, at least in musical terms. The Choral writing is an absolute jewel of composition, while the Orchestra (contrary to the excessive forces of Berlioz and Verdi) serves, in the best possible way, the text and the scope of the work.
Lukecash12, I can subscribe to what you have claimed about the connection of faith and the religious works. It is at least awkward to any none sharing (even to some extent) the purpose, the scope and the meaning of the text sung, sometimes so repeatedly (just count how many times a "Kyrie Eleison" or an "Amen" are sung in the respective movements. I think for non-believers this is a sort of torture, whether they try to ignore or bypass the words). As Moody said, a non-believer can enjoy the music as an observer, but what this may mean. Can one enjoys an eating experience as an observer? Can anyone gets the utmost of love by being an observer in a relation? In the listening experience, the audience _participate_! They share the experience with the work of the composer. Otherwise, by "observing", they keep a distance very crucial for appreciating the whole experience and the total artistic phenomenon. 
Finally, Delicious Manager, the "Bible", fiction or not (by the way, not all operatic libretti are fictional; some are based on true stories) is the _reference_ Book/source for a great part of the people in this planet and that counts more than the actual character of it. Libretti "are often ridiculous and nonsensical", but, that's the greatness of Classical (and not only) Music; it transcends the text and, most importantly, can make audiences believe or at least participate/share what's happening on the stage and in the score. In this vein, the agnostic (by the way, the agnostics are believers; they believe in the _unknown God_!) and atheist composers mentioned by DM, managed to write some great, glorious, even monumental Requiems to serve the scope and purpose of the work, overcoming their limitations and respecting the actual subject of their composition. Good for them!

Principe


----------



## Arsakes

Haven't listened to many...

1. Mozart
2. Dvorak
3. Brahms

also I've heard nice things about Berlioz and Verdi Requiems.


----------



## Arsakes

Delicious Manager said:


> Among agnostic and atheist composers who wrote sacred requiems, there are:
> 
> Berlioz
> Brahms
> Mozart (yes!)
> Schumann
> Verdi


I know no one you mentioned is atheist. Others are (Christian or non/C kind of) Deist and Berlioz can be considered agnostic. Wagner also was a deist.

I don't mind atheists as long as they don't be a dirtbag like Richard Dawkins :lol:


----------



## Chrythes

Arsakes said:


> I know no one you mentioned is atheist. Others are (Christian or non/C kind of) Deist and Berlioz can be considered agnostic. Wagner also was a deist.
> 
> I don't mind atheists as long as they don't be a dirtbag like Richard Dawkins :lol:


Berlioz, according to Wikipedia and this reference - Boult, G. K. Life of Berlioz. 1903, was an atheist, apparently he proclaimed himself as such in his letters.

Verdi was an atheist, or if you'd like a "free thinker" - _Verdi's attitude toward religion is clearly indicated in a letter written about him by his wife, Giuseppina: "For some virtuous people a belief in God is necessary. Others, equally perfect, while observing every precept of the highest moral code, are happier believing in nothing."_

Brahms was agnostic, or essentially a freethinker humanist. His requiem is based on humanistic values not on religious values and beliefs.


----------



## Webernite

I like Brahms' Requiem, but it's somehow unlike any of his other works. It's so big I listen to it almost like Wagner.


----------



## principe

At least the "atheists" Berlioz and Brahms, with their Requiems, they serve pretty well the purpose and the texts the have to defend. Religious people feel not betrayed at all by their "beliefs". They were and are quite happy with the results.
As for Brahms, I don't see that much the "humanist" values to prevail over the religious. Whenever and wherever (I witnessed that) it is performed, it is as a totally religious choral work. As for me, I feel the essence of faith pretty much strengthened and enhanced. 
By the way, "agnostic" means predominantly the one who believes in the Unknown God rather than a "free thinker". I consider myself as such.

Principe


----------



## Lukecash12

Chrythes said:


> Berlioz, according to Wikipedia and this reference - Boult, G. K. Life of Berlioz. 1903, was an atheist, apparently he proclaimed himself as such in his letters.
> 
> Verdi was an atheist, or if you'd like a "free thinker" - _Verdi's attitude toward religion is clearly indicated in a letter written about him by his wife, Giuseppina: "For some virtuous people a belief in God is necessary. Others, equally perfect, while observing every precept of the highest moral code, are happier believing in nothing."_
> 
> Brahms was agnostic, or essentially a freethinker humanist. His requiem is based on humanistic values not on religious values and beliefs.


Then why does he use a religious text and a religious form, with a religious name?


----------



## Lukecash12

principe said:


> At least the "atheists" Berlioz and Brahms, with their Requiems, they serve pretty well the purpose and the texts the have to defend. Religious people feel not betrayed at all by their "beliefs". They were and are quite happy with the results.
> As for Brahms, I don't see that much the "humanist" values to prevail over the religious. Whenever and wherever (I witnessed that) it is performed, it is as a totally religious choral work. As for me, I feel the essence of faith pretty much strengthened and enhanced.
> By the way, "agnostic" means predominantly the one who believes in the Unknown God rather than a "free thinker". I consider myself as such.
> 
> Principe


I'm not sure where you get that definition, because it certainly wouldn't come from a philosophy class.


----------



## principe

Of course, in philosophic terms, "agnostic" has less to do with religion. In religious terms, it is often used as "agnostic theist", to be more specific. However, since we talk about religion here, I thought the term agnostic can be used in this context and not the philosophical one.

Principe


----------



## Arsakes

I'm confused about Verdi ... So he did all that interesting Requiem for just benefit? I'm disappoint.

At least I'm sure about Haydn's and Dvorak's alignments!


----------



## Jord

Verdi - Dies Irae is the only requiem i've thoroughly listened to, which i enjoyed very much


----------



## Hesoos

1. Mozart
2. Fauré
3. Cherubini
4. Berlioz
5. Saint Saens


----------



## Hesoos

Jord said:


> Verdi - Dies Irae is the only requiem i've thoroughly listened to, which i enjoyed very much


Try with the Mozart's Dies Irae and the Cherubini's Dies Irae!! You will feel like you were in hell! They are very scary!!


----------



## Hesoos

Lukecash12 said:


> Then why does he use a religious text and a religious form, with a religious name?


Even though you don't believe in God, you can feel religious feelings with the great composer's music, the music can be an oratorio, mass, requiem or opera ....


----------



## Lukecash12

principe said:


> Of course, in philosophic terms, "agnostic" has less to do with religion. In religious terms, it is often used as "agnostic theist", to be more specific. However, since we talk about religion here, I thought the term agnostic can be used in this context and not the philosophical one.
> 
> Principe


I see... I had thought that you were correcting the commonly used term, which is the philosophical one defining an atheist who is not sure whether or not a deity or deities exist.


----------



## Lukecash12

Hesoos said:


> Even though you don't believe in God, you can feel religious feelings with the great composer's music, the music can be an oratorio, mass, requiem or opera ....


Right, religious feelings, not humanistic feelings. It was being argued that Brahms' requiem was humanistic. If he had wanted to make a humanistic work, I don't think he would have written a requiem, with religious text.


----------



## Lenfer

*Brahms 
[*]Mozart
[*]Fauré
[*]Britten
[*]Dvořák*

:tiphat:​


----------



## Sonata

Just when I thought I couldn't like you any more than I already do Lenfer, I see Brahms is your top Requiem . Mine too. 

1) Brahms
2) Faure
3) Durufle
4) Mozart
5) Dvorak


----------



## Lenfer

Sonata said:


> Just when I thought I couldn't like you any more than I already do Lenfer, I see Brahms is your top Requiem . Mine too.
> 
> 1) Brahms
> 2) Faure
> 3) Durufle
> 4) Mozart
> 5) Dvorak


I love *Brahms* childhood memories. I'm ashamed to say I haven't heard the *Duruflé's* requiem  I must make a point to listen to it over the weekend. Your not too bad yourself *Sonata*. :kiss::cheers:


----------



## Sonata

Have you heard the piano four-hands version of the Brahms? Not quite as good as the original, but I love it too. Seraphic Fire has a recording of it. I love his violin sonatas, clarinet trio, and 2nd piano concerto as well. 

The Durufle is very serene, similar in some ways to Faure's


----------



## Machiavel

Hmmm! Berlioz, Fauré, Mozart, Verdi, Brahms.


----------



## Chrythes

Lenfer said:


> I love *Brahms* childhood memories. I'm ashamed to say I haven't heard the *Duruflé's* requiem  I must make a point to listen to it over the weekend. Your not too bad yourself *Sonata*. :kiss::cheers:


The Durufle is great, it's a rather melancholic work, at least for me. I suggest this version -








The performances here are without the orchestra - only chorus, organ and the occasional cello I believe, so the mood is more intimate and somewhat more engaging than most of the other versions.


----------



## Orange Soda King

I don't know if this would make anyone's top 5, but Herbert Howell's Requiem is one of the most solemn heart breaking choral pieces I know. Written right after the death of his young son, I believe.


----------



## Andreas

Cherubini (c minor)
Fauré
Górecki
Ligeti
Mozart/Süßmayr


----------



## Novelette

1. Cherubini, C Minor
2. Cherubini, D Minor
3. Berlioz
4. Tied: Campra and Fux
5. Schumann

Schumann's requiem is very good, despite the derision of which it has been the unfortunate victim. I'm also very fond of Gossec's Messe des Morts, and Michael Haydn's Requiem.


----------



## Tristan

Duruflé's is a little underrated, it seems. My top 5 are:

1. Duruflé
2. Fauré
3. Verdi
4. Mozart
5. Dvorak

I didn't know Schumann even wrote a Requiem.


----------



## Novelette

Tristan said:


> Duruflé's is a little underrated, it seems. My top 5 are:
> 
> 1. Duruflé
> 2. Fauré
> 3. Verdi
> 4. Mozart
> 5. Dvorak
> 
> I didn't know Schumann even wrote a Requiem.


It is Opus 148, and it exists in two forms: one with orchestral accompaniment, and one with organ accompaniment. It is an excellent work, a kind of begging for repose.

He also wrote a Mass in C Minor, Opus 147, which is also excellent. It too exists in both forms.

Some have simply branded them among the "uninspired" works of Schumann's mental degeneration. However, that assumption I have found without substance, as both works are masterful.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

1. Mozart
2. Brahms
3. Requiem For Suzy Creamcheese (from Psychedelia-A Musical Light Show) 
4. Dvorak
5. Berlioz


----------



## Novelette

The Introit movement is the crown jewel of Campra's Requiem.

Time 0:00 to 8:25


----------



## RobertoDevereux

I just found this thread... Just to add to your list, Thomas Beveridge's Yizikor Requiem is very powerful (although not exactly easy on the ear).

RD


----------



## NightHawk

The German Requiem by Johannes Brahms is not a Roman Catholic Requiem Mass - it is not translated from Latin or any other language it is taken from the German Luther Bible and steers clear of dogma. It is not functional as a Mass for the Dead or any liturgical service.



emiellucifuge said:


> Yes it is, hes just chosen the german translation


----------



## GSchiappe

1 - Fauré
2 - Mozart
3 - Verdi
4 - Cherubini's C minor
5 - Dvorak


----------



## ptr

1: Britten
2: Weinberg
3: Duruflé
4: Verdi
5: Fauré

/ptr


----------



## stevenski

Schumann's requiem ANd Mass are great works; some people are i think too scared of psychological illness to let themselves appreciate them; not that they are not great works anyway-they are; but i have a gut feeling SOME people, not all, are frightened by the slightly fragmentary nature of this music, as Schumann fell apart
Steve


----------



## Guest

stevenski said:


> Schumann's requiem ANd Mass are great works; *some people are i think too scared of psychological illness to let themselves appreciate them*; not that they are not great works anyway-they are; but i have a gut feeling SOME people, not all, are frightened by the slightly fragmentary nature of this music, as Schumann fell apart
> Steve


I don't even know what that means. Are you saying there is some risk of becoming mentally ill from listening to these?


----------



## rborganist

As someone who has sung the choral parts of all my choices, I'll keep them in alphabetical order, since I would not presume to rank the greatness of these works:

Brahms
Durufle
Faure
Mozart
Verdi

I'm not sure I would describe Verdi as an atheist, though he apparently did not practice Catholicism for much of his life. That may have had something to do with people's disapproval of his living with Giuseppina Strepponi for a number of years before he married her. (She was for a time an opera singer, and sang the role of Abigaille in the premiere of Nabucco. Singing the fiendishly difficult music of this part too often contributed to her early vocal decline and shortened her career.) 
I never had understood why he didn't marry her sooner, as he was a widower whose children were also dead and she had never married (she had several illegitimate children), so in theory there should have been no barrier to his doing so.

Verdi's Requiem follows the liturgical text more closely than does Brahms, which is a combination of the liturgical texts and Biblical texts. Nonetheless, both Mozart's and Verdi's Requiems are quasi-operatic in their vocal requirements, while Durufle's is more closely rooted in plainchant, and Faure specifically asked for voices which were more lyrical and less "operatic" sounding for his soloists. As different as they are, all are beautiful works which repay listening and re-listening.


----------



## NightHawk

Tomas Luis Vittoria
Jan Dismas Zelenka (c minor)
Michael Haydn
Luigi Cherubini
Gabriel Faure


----------



## musicican

1. Dvořák
2. Mozart
3. Duruflé
4. Rutter


----------



## duteurtre

Fauré, absolutely (I know of three versions, maybe my preferred is by Herreweghe on Harmonia Mundi).

Duruflé's is certainly interesting, although for a 1947 composition, it doesn't sound radical at all and that is perhaps why it is often compared with Fauré's (but I beg to differ, they are quite different).

I prefer more intimate Requiem works personally, as opposed to the larger, more pompous 19th century works (Brahms, Verdi, Berlioz, Dvorak... ugh... but that's just me ).


----------



## Orange Soda King

The Brahms isn't pompous!! :O

But I do like intimate, inward choral works a lot.


----------



## brianericksoncomposer

1. Verdi
2. Mozart
3. Faure
4. Berlioz
5. Ligeti


----------



## MagneticGhost

No order

Berlioz
Brahms
Ligeti
Victoria
Morales
Britten's War Requiem (not sure if I'm allowed this so I'm putting it in as my sixth choice)


----------



## Celloissimo

1. Verdi
2. Brahms
3. Berlioz 
4. Mozart
5. Saint-Saens (dreadfully underrated)


----------



## MagneticGhost

Celloissimo said:


> 1. Verdi
> 2. Brahms
> 3. Berlioz
> 4. Mozart
> 5. Saint-Saens (dreadfully underrated)


Ooooh. I didn't even know Saint-Saens had written one. That's one for me to hunt down. Thanks


----------



## zeszut

verdi
berlioz
saint-saens
cavalli

oh ... and did i say verdi?


----------



## unpocoscherzando

1. Brahms - Ein deutsches Requiem
2. Mozart
3. Palestrina - Missa pro defunctis
4. Tavener - Requiem (2008)
5. Schumann

Tavener has composed several interesting 'Requiems'; his most recent, however, is especially worth a considered listen.


----------



## Christo

1. Duruflé
2. Howells, Hymnus Paradisi
3. Howells, Requiem
4. Britten, War Requiem
5. Avetisyan [Avetissian]


----------



## Gustavgraves

1. Dvorak (!!)
2. Penderecki 
3. Verdi
4. Michael Haydn
5. Mozart


----------



## SerbenthumInDerMusik

Kurt Weill - Berliner Requiem anyone?

Anyway,

Victoria
Mozart
Ockeghem
Durufle
Brahms
(in any order).


----------



## Bone

Berlioz
Verdi
Ligeti
Britten
Penderecki


----------



## Aquos

1. Brahms
2. Berlioz
3. Victoria
4. Mozart
5. Schnittke


----------



## Neo Romanza

In no order:

Durufle, Faure, Berlioz, Brahms, Britten


----------



## Aquos

For me that I am a requiem lover... I have like 30 different requeims in my computer, I think that Brahms and Berlioz are the more profound requiems i have ever heard. 

Yesterday I found a very courious requiem in a form of lieder cycle... I found it very interesting... I actually loved it! It is the requiem of Albert Schnelzer.


----------



## Selby

After having given it some thought:

1. Faure

2. Brahms
3. Howells
4. Saint-Saens
5. Cherubini

Honorable mentions to Victoria, Durufle, Tavener, Ligeti, Mozart, & Schnittke. 
I'll revist this next year and tweak.


----------



## katdad

I've sung in these, and really liked them:

Mozart
Faure
Berlioz
Brahms

and another requiem I like but haven't sung, Mahler.

What blew me away? Standing there in the chorus (myself a bass/baritione), singing that amazing "Kyrie" from the Mozart requiem. As with all fugal compositions, you can become swept up into the rhythm and the energy is indescribable.

Those of you who've actually sung choral music will appreciate what this can do to you. Those who haven't, I can attest to this: if you think you've felt the immense energy of simply being in the audience and hearing something like Messiah or a great requiem, I will say that actually singing the music is easily a quantum jump beyond. You're transformed and you are no longer an individual, but a spark helping power an immense engine. And fugues are particularly electric, as you can guess.


----------



## Mahlerian

katdad said:


> and another requiem I like but haven't sung, Mahler.


???

You mean the "Resurrection" Symphony? Mahler never wrote a mass because he could not in good faith set the words of the credo (no pun intended).


----------



## Novelette

Neo Romanza said:


> In no order:
> 
> Durufle, *Faure, Berlioz, Brahms, Britten*


Great list, there!

With Berlioz's requiem, I adore the offortorium especially. The Dies Irae movement is really good for stressful days, and is a remarkably dramatic depiction of the end of days, but it isn't the high point of the work, in my opinion. Sometimes when I have suggested the requiem to an acquaintance, they seem to stop at Dies Irae and continue no further.


----------



## Neo Romanza

Novelette said:


> Great list, there!
> 
> With Berlioz's requiem, I adore the offortorium especially. The Dies Irae movement is really good for stressful days, and is a remarkably dramatic depiction of the end of days, but it isn't the high point of the work, in my opinion. Sometimes when I have suggested the requiem to an acquaintance, they seem to stop at Dies Irae and continue no further.


Berlioz's _Requiem_ is such a masterpiece. I haven't listened to the work in years. I may have to change this very soon. I think I'll break out the old Colin Davis/LSO recording. Davis was, for me, the undisputed king of Berlioz conductors.


----------



## Novelette

Neo Romanza said:


> Berlioz's _Requiem_ is such a masterpiece. I haven't listened to the work in years. I may have to change this very soon. I think I'll break out the old Colin Davis/LSO recording. *Davis was, for me, the undisputed king of Berlioz conductors.*


Wholeheartedly agreed, NR! 

May he rest in peace.


----------



## belfastboy

DURUFLE REQUIEM - excellent.....


----------



## Benny

My choice is:

Mozart
Brahms
Faure
Sainst Saens
Victoria 

Now someone above mentioned requiems by Sammartini and Franck. I searched Amazon and Youtube and there is no trace to any of them!!!

Benny


----------



## katdad

Mahlerian said:


> ???
> 
> You mean the "Resurrection" Symphony? Mahler never wrote a mass because he could not in good faith set the words of the credo (no pun intended).


A case of brain fade on my part, and being in a hurry. I'd meant Saint-Saens. Duh.


----------



## Benny

Can't one edit past messages?
I changed my mind. My fifth name is Andrew Lloyd Webber.


----------



## Guest

I posted here long ago. I'm going to post again - I don't know if my list has changed.

J.C. Bach
Mozart
Faure
Biber
Brahms

Can't believe I don't yet own the Dvorak yet!


----------



## Cosmos

I really don't listen to a lot of requiems...so my list is

Mozart
Faure
Brahms
Verdi (though it sounds more secular opera than sacred mass)


----------



## Llyranor

Brahms
Verdi
Mozart
Faure

I'm not familiar enough with the others yet!


----------



## dbcrow

Vaughan Williams choral music is sublime. Did he write a requiem?


----------



## Novelette

Benny said:


> My choice is:
> 
> Mozart
> Brahms
> Faure
> Sainst Saens
> *Victoria*


I've only recently discovered Victoria's requiem. The Introitus was known to me but I never knew where it came from until a few months ago.

I easily consider Victoria on the same level with Palestrina and Byrd.


----------



## Bix

dbcrow said:


> Vaughan Williams choral music is sublime. Did he write a requiem?


No. But he wrote a Mass.


----------



## korenbloem

mine:

Verdi
Britten
Mozart
Schnittke
ligetti


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Been enjoying the Fauré 
Also like the Biber, Verdi, Ligeti and M. Haydn. 
Need to listen to the Schittke, I like Schnittke but I haven't heard his requiem yet!


----------



## Brahmatist

Brahms' "Ein Deutsches Requiem" technically isn't one, but it still deserves the top spot.


----------



## Bas

*Mozart*

Zelenka
Thomas luis de Victoria
M. Haydn
Faure
Brahms


----------



## Op.123

Mozart
Brahms 
Faure
Verdi
Schumann


----------



## Bix

Brahmatist said:


> Brahms' "Ein Deutsches Requiem" technically isn't one, but it still deserves the top spot.


Chorally no it's not a requiem but technically it is one, a Requiem does not have to be in Latin to be canonically valid.


----------



## Virharmonic

I would have to go : Mozart (although he might not have written it), Dvorak, Verdi, Brahms and Zbigniew Preisner


----------



## TrevBus

While I am not into this style of music all that mush, I must say that Faure, Verdi and Mozart stand out for me. I would say Haydn but his are not considered "Requiems". However, I would rate Haydn's sacred music above all others.


----------



## EllenBurgess

Brahms
Verdi
Mozart
Berlioz
Dvorak


----------



## Forkisking

1. Mozart
2. Brahms 
3. Dvorak 
4. Verdi
5. Rütti


----------



## perempe

I'll attend Faure's Requiem in Budapest on Monday.

I'm an opera fan, and i have have withdrawal symptoms as the season is over!


----------



## hpowders

1. Verdi
2. Britten's War Requiem
3. Fauré
4. Mozart

Four.That's it for me.


----------



## Goren

1) Preisner
2) Preisner
3) Preisner
4) Preisner
5) Preisner

Yes, it is the best requiem in the world. 
Cheers,
P

http://music.baidu.com/song/18956852#ce262e4135a0650da8e0f1b47092fd3b

http://music.baidu.com/song/18961676#ffb81b8a0c64a7a6594120eb85b36a0a

http://music.baidu.com/song/18962405#ab512396ea12663b93493b805ef44af6

Press the blue triangular "play" button located on the middle-left of the page.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

1. *Kokkonen*
2. Verdi
3. Ligeti
4. Mozart-Druce 
5. Fauré


----------



## Lukecash12

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> 1. *Kokkonen*
> 2. Verdi
> 3. Ligeti
> 4. Mozart-Druce
> 5. Fauré


I definitely second Faure and Ligeti. One of Faure's most impressive works.


----------



## 38157

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> 1. Kokkonen
> 2. Verdi
> 3. Ligeti
> 4. *Mozart-Druce *
> 5. Fauré


Duncan Druce occasionally lectures at my university, and sometimes plays concerts there. He's a very good musician, but sadly the last concert I saw him play bored me almost to tears (it was with an early music ensemble, and there wasn't enough contrast in the set to maintain interest).

Baffles me to see that Penderecki isn't at no. 1 in all lists - maybe my opinion isn't as objective as I'd like to think?


----------



## Richannes Wrahms

something something *Schumann* something something something *André Campra* something *Cherubini* something something


----------



## QuietGuy

No particular order:

Mozart 1791
Faure 1888
Rutter 1985
Andrew Lloyd Webber 1985
Karl Jenkins 2005


----------



## Guest

I'd like to list some later, but I'd also like clarification on which of these are actually requiem masses? Not that I won't list the non-traditional ones, but I'm just curious about Brahms, Britten, Ligeti, etc. 

By the way, I really enjoyed Henze's instrumental "requiem" comprised of nine "sacred concertos".


----------



## Guest

In the traditional liturgical sense, Brahms and Britten did not write Requiem masses. I can't speak to Ligeti - I have never heard his.

But they did write Requiems. A Requiem mass is a very specific thing. I would say all Requiem masses are Requiems, but not all Requiems are Requiem masses.


----------



## Wat

obviously the best requiem is the Mansell requiem

in all seriousness though,
1. Mozart
2. Brahms
3. Berlioz


----------



## Wat

well i just replied to a year old thread


----------



## KenOC

Beethoven had an opinion: "Among all the composers alive Cherubini is the most worthy of respect. I am in complete agreement, too, with his conception of the 'Requiem,' and if ever I come to write one I shall take note of many things."


----------



## Pugg

Verdi
Mozart
Dvorak
Cherubini


----------



## DavidA

Verdi
Mozart
Britten
Faure
Victoria


----------



## Bayreuth

Mozart
Berlioz
Faure
Brahms 
Bruckner


----------



## drfaustus

1- MOZART . Mozart's Requiem is unquestionable.

2 de Victoria (Officium defunctorum)
3- Faure
4-Brahms
5- Berlioz


----------



## Morimur

Mozart
Ligeti
Kurtág (though it's not technically a requiem)
Lutosławski


----------



## SixFootScowl

Brahms German Requiem if wonderful.


----------



## Ramiste

Not a full-fledged Requiem but a touching little masterpiece written by a Puccini at the peak of his career to honour Verdi, his predecessor on the throne of italian opera:






It is interesting to compare it with another non-Requiem of his, from the early opera EDGAR, which was chose by Toscanini as the soundtrack for Puccini's own funeral:


----------



## Vronsky

1. Berlioz
2. Mozart
3. Cherubini 
4. Ligeti
5. Verdi


----------



## KetchupOnIce

Mozart is my obvious choice, but Michael Haydn has a wonderful requiem, it's an exceptional piece by an otherwise not-so exceptional composer.
I don't really feed qualified to make a top 5, as I don't enjoy a lot of music after 1840 or before 1610.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

For me, in order of personal preference:

1. Fauré
2. Britten
3. Mozart
4. Schnittke
5. Victoria


----------



## AClockworkOrange

My five choices, in no order of preference, would presently include:
- Fauré
- Saint-Säens
- Berlioz
- Dvorak
- Mozart

Stanford could make the list but I need more listening time before I can say either way.


----------



## dbcrow

Bix said:


> No. But he wrote a Mass.


The Mass is amazing, but not, technically speaking, a requiem. As you know.


----------



## flamencosketches

Does this count? It's beautiful.


----------



## Joe B

Today, my top 5 would be:

1 - Rutter
2 - Dale
3 - Fauré
4 - Verdi
5 - Mozart

Who knows about tomorrow?


----------



## Bwv 1080

Ligeti
Stravinsky
Schnittke
Ockeghem


----------



## Highwayman

1- Fauré
2- Zelenka (C minor)
3- Cherubini (C minor)
4- M. Haydn (C minor)
5- Brahms 

C minor certainly works well for me


----------



## Josquin13

I wish that I could name Guillaume Dufay's Requiem Mass, which was probably the first Requiem ever composed, as among my favorites, but it's either gone missing or hasn't survived. Perhaps, like Alessandro Striggio's newly discovered Missa Ecco Si Beata Giorno, which was found several years ago by Davit Moroney in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, having been misfiled under the wrong name for several centuries--Dufay's Requiem is similarly languishing in some old library, possibly in Spain or Portugal?

Curiously, the Order of the Golden Fleece has survived, but apparently not the Requiem that Dufay composed for them. Do they have an old library, I wonder? (Or, are they connected to the Order of Santiago, which has also survived...? and does that Order have an old library, perhaps in one of their oldest monasteries?) Why would anyone throw something like that out?!!! Perhaps the early Iberian composers--Victoria, Guerrero, Cardoso, & Morales--knew Dufay's Requiem, & used it as their model (guarding it a bit too well?), as they seem to have particularly excelled at composing Requiems...

But instead, Johannes Ockeghem gets the credit for having composed the first Requiem Mass. It's beauty, and easily makes my list of top 10 favorites (sorry, I couldn't do just 5, as I have too much music in my head...):

1. Johannes Ockeghem: 




2. Manuel Cardoso: Missa pro Defunctis a 6: 




3. Tomas luis de la Victoria: 




4. Francisco Guerrero: 




5. Jean Richafort: Requiem in memoriam Josquin Desprez: 



 (Cinquecento's recording isn't on YT, so the Huelgas Ensemble will have to suffice, but fortunately it is excellent, too).

6. Cristóbal de Morales: Requiem a 5: 




7. W.A. Mozart: 




8. Eustache Du Caurroy: Missa pro defunctis, 1st performed at the funeral for Henry IV of France, and thereafter for French kings over several centuries:









9. Gabriel Faure: 




10. Orlando di Lasso: Missa pro defunctis: 




Honorable mention:

Johannes Brahms: Ein Deutsches Requiem, or German Requiem: 




Also excellent:

Michael Haydn: Requiem in C minor, MH 155: Missa pro defuncto Achiepiscopo Sigismundo: 




Joseph Martin Kraus: Requiem in D Minor: 




Heinrich Ignaz Franz von Biber: Requiem à 15 in A-Dur: 



, and, Requiem in F minor: 



.


----------



## MarioDelMonacoViva

1. Mozart
1. Verdi
3. Brahms
4. Faure
5. Berlioz









Mozart and Verdi are joint first. My favourite recordings are:









Mozart - Barenboim, Armstring, Baker, Gedda, Fischer-Dieskau
Verdi - Giulini, Schwarzkopf, Ludwig, Gedda, Ghiaurov
Brahms - Klemperer, Schwarzkopf, Fischer-Dieskau
Faure - Cluytens, De Los Angeles, Fischer-Dieskau (Lots of Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, I know)
Berlioz - Davis, Tagliavini


----------



## Fabulin

There are only two I really liked:
1. Mozart's 
2. _A World Requiem_ by John Foulds. In contrast to the rather abstract nature of other requiems, this one is a direct response to the tragedy of events still rather contemporary to us (composed 1918-1921). It feels profound in its aim and message. The opening chords and bells are enough to wipe a smile off my face. It has also some great themes, and the choirs are mirable. The opening overture is a worthy composition even on its own. I like to read _The Lord of the Rings_ to this; they go well together.


----------



## Rogerx

Verdi.
Mozart.
Berlioz.
Cherubini.
Fauré .


----------



## Larkenfield

A requiem a day keeps the deities at bay.


----------



## Bwv 1080

Schnittke
Stravinsky
Ligeti
Ockeghem


----------



## starthrower

Schnittke
Faure
Cherubini
Brahms
Verdi

The only ones I've listened to in addition to Ligeti's which I can't remember.


----------



## PlaySalieri

starthrower said:


> Schnittke
> Faure
> Cherubini
> Brahms
> Verdi
> 
> The only ones I've listened to in addition to Ligeti's which I can't remember.


maybe you will listen to Mozarts


----------



## Oortone

Interestingly, Ligeti's requiem ends after "Lacrimosa". That's usually where I end Mozart's Requiem too.


----------



## david johnson

This thread has piqued my interest regarding music I have yet to hear. I surfing for info, I discovered - Georg Pasterwitz composed the Michael Haydn C minor Requiem. Did he?


----------



## Rogerx

david johnson said:


> This thread has piqued my interest regarding music I have yet to hear. I surfing for info, I discovered - Georg Pasterwitz composed the Michael Haydn C minor Requiem. Did he?


This is from Wikipedia:

Requiem (previously attributed to Michael Haydn)


----------



## flamencosketches

Brahms
Fauré
Mozart
Schnittke
Berlioz

Only 5 I know off the top of my head, quite frankly, but all are amazing.


----------



## Rogerx

Mayr: Requiem in G minor

Bottesini: Messa da Requiem

Cimarosa: Requiem in G minor


This day .


----------



## starthrower

PlaySalieri said:


> maybe you will listen to Mozarts


I'll listen to any beautiful choral work. I just heard Faure again on the radio. Such a beautiful piece of music. In fact I think it's being performed live here during the holidays. Will have to look into getting some tickets.


----------



## Roger Knox

Mozart
Verdi
Fauré
Brahms
Duruflé


----------



## flamencosketches

^I need to hear the Duruflé Requiem. I've been enjoying his Messe Cum Jubilo lately. It seems there are several versions of the Requiem out there, one of them is just organ, solo cello, and mixed choir; another seems to include a full large orchestra.


----------



## cougarjuno

I like the slightly more austere Liszt Requiem compared to Durufle and Faure. Love the Verdi though as well as the Mozart.


----------



## Bxnwebster

Faure
Mozart
Nunes Garcia
Zeisl
Zelenka (ZWV 46)


----------



## SanAntone

First Five
*Duruflé
Faure
Mozart
Palestrina* (Missa pro defunctis)
*Victoria*

Next Five
Ockeghem
Jean Richafort 
Stravinsky (Requiem Canticles)
Morales
Duarte Lobo


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Fauré
Duruflé
Dvořák
Berlioz
Hmm...Victoria? Saint-Saëns? Rutter?

Mozart’s and Verdi’s have never connected with me outside of certain parts...in both, I get very bored after the Tuba Mirum.


----------



## gellio

Delicious Manager said:


> The Brahms _Deutsches Requiem_ almost makes me cry with boredom.


How? I just listened to this work for the first time this past Wednesday and I've listened to nothing else since. I can't stop. It takes my breath away. It's one of those rare pieces that affects me to the core of my soul. It's just stunning - from the first note to the last.

To each his own, but it's been a long time since a new piece (new to me) has had me so captivated.


----------



## gellio

1. Brahms
2. Mozart
3. Berlioz
4. Verdi
5. Schumann


----------



## mparta

gellio said:


> 1. Brahms
> 2. Mozart
> 3. Berlioz
> 4. Verdi
> 5. Schumann


Allergic to the concept of Brahms (ridiculous bias, concerned about the "conservatism" of it) but the German Requiem is truly great music to me, soup to nuts, best with Gundula Janowitz and Jose Van Dam. 
Mozart Requiem I don't connect with, probably lack of effort but there's something about Mozart choral writing that seems to bypass the clarity of his intentions in a way that I find fuzzes the whole thing up. I will try again.
Berlioz, I think we discussed before and I went back and listened to the McCreech, I think it's very good, maybe my way into the work.
Verdi is the winner hands down for me. Nothing shatters the earth like that Dies Irae, and nothing is as hopelessly penitent as the Libera me.
Schumann I don't know.
Faure has its beauties, a bit perfumed. Kathleen Battle for Guilini, unbelievable.
Hindemith more for the text, believe it or not, than the music, but it is Whitman.

That's sort of it on the short leash on cold morning trying to work.

There must be an almost limitless trove of pre-romantic works that fit this description in some way or other that I don't know, those better versed have already referenced them. Good chance to expand.


----------



## eljr

tenor02 said:


> 2. Rutter (if you havnt...you need to).


This!

Also, Rebecca Dale, Requiem for My Mother

Faure 
Benjamin Britten War Requiem
Brahms


----------



## hammeredklavier

hammeredklavier said:


> It's interesting how "personal" Michael gets in his *Requiem* (1771) compared to his immediate predecessors and contemporaries, Pergolesi (stabat mater), Zelenka (requiems in C minor and D minor), Ernst Eberlin (Requiem No.8 in C), Christian Bach (sequentia della messa de morti) and Adolph Hasse (requiems in C and E flat). I think Michael was the "Berlioz" of his time. The recapitulations of various material throughout the work also seem interesting.
> 
> "trumpet signal" & requiem 1st theme: [ 0:20 ]
> requiem 2nd theme: [ 3:20 ~ 3:45 ]
> lacrimosa theme: [ 11:40 ~ 11:48 ]
> chromatic fourth theme (climbing from D to G in the bassline): [ 12:40 ~ 12:50 ]
> hosanna theme (lacrimosa theme recapitulated): [ 24:21 ~ 24:29 ]
> "trumpet signal": [ 26:48 , 27:56 ]
> chromatic fourth theme recapitulated (climbing from G to C in the soprano solo): [ 28:40 ~ 28:50 ]
> cum sanctis tuis fugue: [ 29:17 ~ 31:16 ]
> requiem 2nd theme recapitulated: [ 31:22 ~ 31:50 ]
> requiem 1st theme recapitulated: [ 31:58 ~ 32:30 ]
> cum sanctis tuis fugue recapitulated: [ 32:38 ~ 34:30 ]





hammeredklavier said:


> J.A. Hasse: Requiem in E-flat major (1764) - Dies irae
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (10:50 ~ 15:24)


I also want to hear a performance of "F. L. Gassmann - Requiem in C minor (1774)", but it's only available as a Vocaloid/MIDI Simulation 




Georg von Pasterwitz (1730~1806) - requiem





Verdi's, Faure's are also fine, but some requiems I'm not terribly into are Berlioz's and Dvorak's. They're like *100 minutes long* each, (unfortunately they aren't Bach's B minor) - and frankly I don't think there are good-enough musical material and working-out to sustain that length. (The only thing I remember from the Dvorak is the confutatis which is obviously modelled on the Mozart.) I'm still open-minded about their possible "merits" (if there are any), unsure if they're worth a second hearing (I'm willing to accept other people's suggestions of "memorable passages"). I'm also not terribly into 17th century requiems (like Biber's F minor) probably due to the high Baroque aesthetics (characterized by the "Doctrine of the Affektenlehre") and its style of orchestral accompaniment and basso continuo.


----------



## Simon23

Brahms
Mozart
Faure
Berlioz
Bruckner - unfortunately, they rarely play, but very beautiful.


----------



## HenryPenfold

In order of merit:

Faure
Wetz
Ligeti
Mozart
Brahms
Verdi (bit long)


----------

