# Favorite 10 Symphonies?



## linz

1. Mahler's 5th
2. Schubert's 8th
3. Beethoven's 9th
4. Bruckner's 7th
5. Brahm's 1st
6. Schubert's 9th
7. Bruckner's 8th
8. Beethoven's 5th
9. Mahler's 9th
10. Bruckner's 9th


----------



## Hexameron

1. Beethoven's 9th
2. Beethoven's 3rd
3. Beethoven's 5th
4. Brahms's 1st
5. Brahms's 4th
6. Tchaikovsky's 6th
7. Liszt's Dante Symphony
8. Liszt's Faust Symphony
9. Mahler's 1st
10. Mozart's 41st

With the exception of Beethoven's 9th, this list is subject to change at any time =)


----------



## Topaz

1. Symphony No. 9 Beethoven
2. Symphony No. 5 Beethoven
3. Symphony No. 6 Beethoven
4. Symphony No. 3 Beethoven
5. Symphony No. 1 Brahms
6. Symphony No. 3 Brahms
7. Symphony No. 4 Brahms
8. Symphony No. 8 Schubert
9. Symphony No. 9 Schubert
10. Symphony No. 3 Schumann


----------



## CTBass

1. Symphony No. 2 Mahler
2. Symphony No. 8 Schubert
3. Symphony No. 10 Shostakovich
4. Symphony No. 7 Mahler
5. Symphony No. 4 Charles Ives
6. Symphony No. 2 Charles Ives
7. Symphony No. 8 Bruckner
8. Symphony No. 1 Brahms
9. Symphony No. 0 Bruckner
10.Symphony No. 4 Tchaikovsky


----------



## sinfonia espansiva

1.Shostakovich 10
2.Haydn 96 "The Miracle"
3.Berlioz : _La Symphonie Fantastique_
4.Liszt : Faust-Symphony
5.Nielsen 1
6.Bruckner 5
7.R.Strauss : _Sinfonia Domestica_
8.Nielsen 3 "sinfonia espansiva"
9.Beethoven 6 "Pastoral"
10.Rachmaninoff 2

It was really difficult, I'm perspiring. Maybe the order is good.


----------



## Topaz

*Sinfonia*

Interesting list there. I hope you won't mind some comments/questions.


Shostakovich: I prefer 5 and 11, but 10 is OK

Haydn: I like 45, 94, 101, 104 (Why no Mozart? I find this fascinating)

Liszt: Faust, yes very good
 
Nielsen: I haven't got that far yet. I like Sibelius 2, 5, 7

Bruckner: I like 4, 7, 8. I didn't think 5 is considered among the best

R Strauss: I don't know it. I'm not too keen on Strauss. Some's OK

Beethoven: Agreed on S6 but what about 3, 5, 7, 9?

Rach: Agreed S2 is nice

Are you not keen on Schumann, Mendelssohn, Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Mahler?

Topaz


----------



## BassFromOboe

In no particular order:

Bruckner 4
Bruckner 8
Tchaikovsky 5
Tchaikovsky Manfred
Brahms 1
Dvorak 9
Vaughan Williams 2
Berlioz Fantastique
Sibelius 2
Sibelius 5

Of the Nielsen symphonies, I think the rather neglected Espansiva is the best (his Helios Overture is another of his neglected masterpieces). With Shostakovich, 10 is the one I like best.


----------



## sinfonia espansiva

BassFromOboe said:


> In no particular order:
> Of the Nielsen symphonies, I think the rather neglected Espansiva is the best (his Helios Overture is another of his neglected masterpieces). With Shostakovich, 10 is the one I like best.


If you've read my ranking (1. Shostakovich 10), you guessed I approve.


----------



## linz

Why hasn't anyone mentioned MARTINU ! ? !


----------



## riverbank

symphonies aren't always top of my list in terms of what I like, but some I like are: 

Bax's 6th
Walton 1st+2nd
Borodin's 2nd
Howard Hanson's Romantic Symphony
Prokofiev 1st (Classical), and 5th isn't bad either
(if this counts) Hindemith's Symphonic Metamorpheses on theme of Carl Von Weber
Vaughan Williams 7th (Antarctica)


----------



## Celloman

I could never come up with a top ten list, given all the thousands of unforgettable symphonies out there, but here are a couple of my favorite symphonies that no one's mentioned:

Stravinsky's Symphony of Psalms
Haydn #60
Mozart #40
Vaughan Williams #6
Nielsen #4 "The Inextinguishable"
Honegger #2
Rachmaninov #3
Roy Harris #3
Henryk Gorecki #3 "Symphony of Sorrowful Songs"


----------



## Edward Elgar

Here are mine:

Bhrams 3rd - Best symphony written in my opinion!
Bhrams 1st
Bhrams 2nd
Shozzy 5th
Dvorak 8th
Dvorak 9th
Sibelius 5th - God can be found in the last movement!
Mozart 40th
Haydn 104th - He left with a bang!
Shubert - 5th

Basically all the famous ones!


----------



## robert newman

1. Beethoven - 'Pastoral', Op.68
2. Rachmaninov - Symphony No. 2
3. Elgar - Symphony No. 1
4. Shostakovitch - Symphony No. 15
5. Schubert - Symphony No. 3
6. Bruckner - Symphony No. 8
7. Dvorak - Symphony No. 9 'From the New World'
8. Brahms - Symphony No. 3
9. Prokofiev - 'Classical Symphony'
10. Glazunov - Symphony No. 4


----------



## Odocoileus

*Bruckner #0?*



CTBass said:


> 1. Symphony No. 2 Mahler
> 2. Symphony No. 8 Schubert
> 3. Symphony No. 10 Shostakovich
> 4. Symphony No. 7 Mahler
> 5. Symphony No. 4 Charles Ives
> 6. Symphony No. 2 Charles Ives
> 7. Symphony No. 8 Bruckner
> 8. Symphony No. 1 Brahms
> 9. Symphony No. 0 Bruckner
> 10.Symphony No. 4 Tchaikovsky


Bruckner #0? Must be a typo.


----------



## Topaz

Regards the above post, there is a Symphony 0 by Bruckner. There's also a 00, but this is very rare.

Symphony 0 is called "Nullte". Oddly, it was written in between 1 and 2. Some authors number their chapters from Chapter 0, so it's not completely unusual.

Topaz


----------



## Odocoileus

How strict is this poll in relation to symphonies? My top 10 include more compositions that are not symphonies yet have the length of symphonies.


----------



## Topaz

I'd keep to symphonies on this thread, and put your other likes on other relevant threads.


----------



## IAmKing

This thread is great. Its definitely going to be a reference point for my classical music purchases for quite a while. My collection of symphonies is rather limited at present you see, I haven't properly heard any outside of all of Sibelius', Mahler's 3rd and 5th, Beethoven's 4th and 5th, and Tchaikovsky's 6th.


----------



## Topaz

*IAM King*: May I suggest you get:

Mozart 39, 40, 41
Beethoven 3, 6, 7, 8, 9
Schubert 5, 8 ("Unfinished"), 9 ("Great")
Schumann 1, 3
Mendelssohn 5
Bruckner 4
Brahms 1, 3, 4
Tchaikovsky 4, 5
Mahler 1, 2, 4
Sibelius 2, 5
Shostakovich 5

.......

These are the main classics, in addition to what you have. For Beethoven, be careful with the choice of CD (see related thread). Same applies to all really, but particularly Beethoven where the first thing some people ask is what version you have.

Topaz


----------



## Odocoileus

IAmKing said:


> This thread is great. Its definitely going to be a reference point for my classical music purchases for quite a while. My collection of symphonies is rather limited at present you see, I haven't properly heard any outside of all of Sibelius', Mahler's 3rd and 5th, Beethoven's 4th and 5th, and Tchaikovsky's 6th.


I have used this thread to learn more aswell. I have compiled the data to determine the most popular symphony among this group. Brahms 1 has more points.

I would post the whole list, I have tried, I don't know of an easy way to transfer the spreadsheet to this website.


----------



## Saturnus

1. - 3. Dvorák no. 5
1. - 3. Beethoven 4
1. - 3. Mahler - 9
4. Berlioz - 'Symphonie Fantastique'
5. Tchaikovsky - no. 6 'Pathétique'
6. Tchaikovsky - no. 1 'Winter Daydreams'
7. Franck - no. 1 (the only one)
8. Brahms - 4
9. Schubert - 5
10. Shostakovich - 8


----------



## Topaz

*RESULTS*

I have looked at the ranks of the 10 posters above who provided ranks, and the following are the results:

*Symphonies*

1	BRAHMS 1
2	BEETHOVEN 9
3	SCHUBERT 8
4	BERLIOZ SF
5	BEETHOVEN 5
5	BEETHOVEN 6
7	BRUCKNER 8
8	SHOSTAKOVICH 10
8	BRAHMS 3
10	BEETHOVEN 3
11	DVORAK 9
12	BRAHMS 4
13	TCHAIKOVSKY 6
13	MAHLER 9
15	HAYDN 96
15	RACHMANINOFF 2
15	MAHLER 5
15	LISZT FAUST
19	SIBELIUS 5
20	BEETHOVEN 4

NOTES:

All done on a spreadsheet giving a score of 10 for the first preference, 9 for second preference etc. Where no rank preference was expressed, the score was allocated evenly.

There was a wide spread of opinion. Although Brahms Symphony No 1 is first, no one listed this as their No 1. However, it was the clear winner as it scored fairly highly among a number of posters. Beethoven No 9 was second. These two were well clear of the next group.

N.B. Obviously, this is all based on very small sample and is very probably statistically not robust, but it is the best that can be done. Thus, do not take the results too literally; there is a wide margin of error. However, it is probably far more useful than looking at individual poster's results, which are scattered all over the place. A bit of quantitative analysis, and less qualitative analysis, does not go amiss now and then. I'm sure Kurk... would agree!

…………………….

*Top Symphonists* based on scores for all works: (index: Beethoven = 100)

1	BEETHOVEN	100
2	BRAHMS	77
3	MAHLER	41
4	BRUCKNER	40
5	SHOSTAKOVICH	34
6	DVORAK	30
7	TCHAIKOVSKY	23
8	BERLIOZ	21
9	HAYDN 16
10	SIBELIUS 15
11	RACHMANINOFF 14
12	MOZART	10

Beethoven the clear winner!!!

Although Mozart and Haydn are low down this list, I am not that surprised. I have detected (with my antennae) that interest has waned somewhat in 18th Century "classical" symphonies.

Topaz


----------



## linz

Topaz, you have obviously did much work to figure out those statistics and I thank you. I myself took a staticstics corse in college, but forgot everything except how to get the mean, or average. Bell Curve, Standard Deviation completely gone from my brain forever! I still have the text book, I suppose I could re-learn everything. Then we could get some quite interesting statistics from the ample information on the internet.


----------



## Odocoileus

linz said:


> Topaz, you have obviously did much work to figure out those statistics and I thank you. I myself took a staticstics corse in college, but forgot everything except how to get the mean, or average. Bell Curve, Standard Deviation completely gone from my brain forever! I still have the text book, I suppose I could re-learn everything. Then we could get some quite interesting statistics from the ample information on the internet.


To get a bell curve, you will need the summary data. I've compiled the "Top Ten Symphony" poll. The rating value is based on the 1-10 number each person has applied to their favorite symphonies. I inverted the results so that #1 = 10, thus #10 = 1, then combined the values. I've tried to post this in a spread sheet format or at least in text so that it is easy to read, but it has not worked.

Composer Score Rating
1 Brahms 1 37
2 Beethoven 9 28
3 Bruckner 8 22
4 Schubert 8 21
5 Beethoven 6 20
6 Beethoven 5 20
7 Shostakovich 10 18
8 Brahms 3 18
9 Beethoven 3 16
10 Dvorak 9 14
11 Mozart 40 11
12 Berlioz La Symphonie Fantastique 11
13 Brahms 4 10
14 Bruckner 4 10
15 Bax 6 10
16 Liszt Faust-Symphony 10
17 Rachmaninov 2 10
18 Stravinsky Symphony of Psalms 10
19 Mahler 2 10
20 Mahler 5 10
21 Walton 1 9
22 Haydn 96 9
23 Haydn 60 9
24 Tchaikovsky 5 8
25 Walton 2 8
26 Brahms 2 8
27 Elgar 1 8
28 Borodin 2 7
29 Mahler 7 7
30 Bruckner 7 7
31 Vaughan Williams 6 7
32 Shostakovich 5 7
33 Tchaikovsky Manfred 7
34 Shostakovitch 15 7
35 Schubert 9 7
36 Howard Hanson Romantic Symphony 6
37 Schubert 3 6
38 Charles Ives 4 6
39 Nielsen 1 6
40 Dvorak 8 6
41 Nielsen 4 6
42 Bruckner 5 5
43 Prokofiev 1 5
44 Charles Ives 2 5
45 Sibelius 5 5
46 Tchaikovsky 6 5
47 Honegger 2 5
48 Rachmaninov 3 4
49 R Strauss Sinfonia Domestica 4
50 Liszt Dante Symphony 4
51 Prokofiev 5 4
52 Vaughan Williams 2 4
53 Nielsen 3 3
54 Roy Harris 3 3
55 Hindemith Symphonic Metamorpheses on theme of Carl Von Weber 3
56 Henryk Gorecki 3 2
57 Mahler 9 2
58 Sibelius 2 2
59 Prokofiev Classical Symphony 2
60 Haydn 104 2
61 Mahler 1 2
62 Bruckner 0 2
63 Vaughan Williams 7 2
64 Shubert 5 1
65 Tchaikovsky 4 1
66 Glazunov 4 1
67 Bruckner 9 1
68 Mozart 41 1
69 Schumann 3 1


----------



## hlolli

1. Beethoven 9th
2. Mahler 5th
3. Widor 5th
4. Mahler 7th
5. Shostakovich 10th
6. Shostakovich 5th
7. R.Strauss - Eine Alpensinfonie
8. Barber Samuel 2nd
9. Dvorak 9th
10. Tchaikovsky 5th

I'd have to spend weeks to find out of what I've heard so far which is my to 10 symphonies.


----------



## Topaz

*Odocoileus*

Several comments on your results.

1. Three few posters did not specify ranks. They listed their top 10 in no particular order. I suspect you may have recognised some, but not all. In such cases, I allocated their scores evenly, and the average of 1-10 is 5.5. Is that what you took, or did you take 5, which I suspect might be the case?

2. I think your score for Berlioz may be incorrect. The total I got is 20.5, not 11. This was: BassfromOboe =5.5; Sinf Esp = 8, Saturnus = 7. Total = 20.5. This has thrown your results way out.

3. I think you may also be wrong with Bruckner 8. I got score = 18.5, compared with your 22. I got mine as follows: Linz = 4; CTBass = 4; Bassfromoboe = 5.5; Robert Newman = 5. Total = 18.5.

4. There are a few other more minor differences, but I have checked mine and I'm happy. I conclude that my scores/ranks are all OK. But I accept there is scope for doubt on some posters' lists.

5. I stressed that the results are not sufficiently robust to construct any kind of distribution. The standard errors are very high, and no _"t-value"_ is above 1.0, and the average is only 0.4. As I said, the results are only very roughly indicative. You need a much bigger sample (30 at least) to get reliable results. Further, no reliable "normal distribution" could conceivably be constructed. Try a _Chi-Squared _test, for example, and you'll see what I mean.

6. You can't transfer Excel results directly into this site. It's not intelligent enough. I've tried.

Topaz


----------



## linz

Wow, Topaz, you know your Applied Mathematics!

www.arkivmusic.com has list with exactly how many recordings of any particular composition from any composer in their massive collection, if you actually were interested in getting accurate stats of popularity of compositions.


----------



## linz

Beethoven *175*
Brahms *131*
Mozart *108* _(35-41 Only!)_
Mahler *71*
Tchaikovsky *68*
Schubert *60*
Schumann *60*
Sibelius *47*
Dvorak *45*
Bruckner *43*
Mendelssohn *43*
Rachmaninov *33*
Shostakovich *29*
Haydn *28* _ (88-104 Only!)_
Nielsen *26*
Prokofiev *24*
Saint-Saens *19*
Borodin *19*
Vaughn Williams *16*
Ives *12*
Martinu *7*
Berwald *6*
Glazunov *5*
Roussel *5*
Gliere *4*
Milhaud *2*

I did this analysis on www.arkivmusic.com. I notice several faults with the data, so I had to do it manually, symphony by symphony, adding up the total recordings of each work!


----------



## Odocoileus

Topaz said:


> *Odocoileus*
> 
> Several comments on your results.
> 
> 1. Three few posters did not specify ranks. They listed their top 10 in no particular order. I suspect you may have recognised some, but not all. In such cases, I allocated their scores evenly, and the average of 1-10 is 5.5. Is that what you took, or did you take 5, which I suspect might be the case?
> 
> 2. I think your score for Berlioz may be incorrect. The total I got is 20.5, not 11. This was: BassfromOboe =5.5; Sinf Esp = 8, Saturnus = 7. Total = 20.5. This has thrown your results way out.
> 
> 3. I think you may also be wrong with Bruckner 8. I got score = 18.5, compared with your 22. I got mine as follows: Linz = 4; CTBass = 4; Bassfromoboe = 5.5; Robert Newman = 5. Total = 18.5.
> 
> 4. There are a few other more minor differences, but I have checked mine and I'm happy. I conclude that my scores/ranks are all OK. But I accept there is scope for doubt on some posters' lists.
> 
> 5. I stressed that the results are not sufficiently robust to construct any kind of distribution. The standard errors are very high, and no _"t-value"_ is above 1.0, and the average is only 0.4. As I said, the results are only very roughly indicative. You need a much bigger sample (30 at least) to get reliable results. Further, no reliable "normal distribution" could conceivably be constructed. Try a _Chi-Squared _test, for example, and you'll see what I mean.
> 
> 6. You can't transfer Excel results directly into this site. It's not intelligent enough. I've tried.
> 
> Topaz


If you really want to explore this, I could send my spreadsheet to you. My calculations are evident in the first page, second page has the data I posted.

Yes, the sample is too small. Yet it has served a purpose, it gave me direction to explore some symphonies that where previously unknown to me.


----------



## Odocoileus

linz said:


> Beethoven *175*
> Brahms *131*
> Mozart *108* _(35-41 Only!)_
> Mahler *71*
> Tchaikovsky *68*
> Schubert *60*
> Schumann *60*
> Sibelius *47*
> Dvorak *45*
> Bruckner *43*
> Mendelssohn *43*
> Rachmaninov *33*
> Shostakovich *29*
> Haydn *28* _ (88-104 Only!)_
> Nielsen *26*
> Prokofiev *24*
> Saint-Saens *19*
> Borodin *19*
> Vaughn Williams *16*
> Ives *12*
> Martinu *7*
> Berwald *6*
> Glazunov *5*
> Roussel *5*
> Gliere *4*
> Milhaud *2*
> 
> I did this analysis on www.arkivmusic.com. I notice several faults with the data, so I had to do it manually, symphony by symphony, adding up the total recordings of each work!


This is more like what I expected by reading this thread. Yet the specific symphonies by popularity would be better.


----------



## Topaz

*Odocoileus:* Can you please send me your spreadsheet. I sent you a PM with my e-mail address some while ago.

*Linz*; Are your figures for all symphonies? If so how did you get 175 for Beethoven when it shows 784? The others are different too. I've only glanced at the Arkivmusik source quickly. Did you only count certain recordings?

Topaz


----------



## linz

As I said, I noticed incorrect data, so I had to do it symphony by symphony. (Click 'symphony' and add up 1-9 on Beethoven, you should get more then 784.)


----------



## Topaz

Yes but what's your 175 refer to? That's what I'm asking.


----------



## linz

(132)1
(134)2
(195)3
(136)4
(235)5
(177)6
(204)7
(143)8
(220)9
Added together equals (1576) divided by 9 equals (175)!


----------



## johnnyx

My Favs:
Bruckner 8, 9, 7
Mahler 3, 4, 9
Beethoven 6, 9, 5, 
Mozart 40


----------



## Tromboneman

1.Mozarts 25th
2.Beethovens 5th
3.Mozarts 40th
4.Mahlers 9th
5.Beethovens 7th
6.altho its not a symphony, i love Tschaikovsky's 1812 Overture
7.Brahm's 1st
8.Liszt-Faust Symphony
9.Beethoven's 9th
10. Brahm's 2nd

those are my favorite symphonies.


----------



## Lisztfreak

Hmmm... a hard task to choose 10 favourite...
Let's say this way:

1. Liszt's 'Dante Symphony'
2. Beethoven's 'Symphony no.5'
3. Beethoven's 'Symphony no.7'
4. Tchaikovsky's 'Symphony no.6, Patetica'
5. Franck's 'Symphony in D minor'
6. Sibelius's 'Symphony no.6'
7. Haydn's 'Symphony no.94, Surprise'
8. Mozart's 'Symphony no.40'
9. Berlioz's 'Symphonie Fantastique'
10. Mendelssohn's 'Symphony no.4, Italian'

I'm really poorly acquainted with Bruckner's, Haydn's and Schubert's symphonies, which I regret. I bet their works would make some new favourites of mine...


----------



## 4/4player

Hmm...This is a much interesting thread..Im a symphony kind of guy..so obviously this list will be very important to me. Here's a little tidbit: Beethoven was often called "the father of symphonies".
1.Beethoven's Ninth "Choral"B) 
2. Tchaikovsky's Sixth-So full of feeling! 
3-10. Beethoven symphonies 1-8 
Basically, Im in love with all the Beethoven's Symphonies,lol
_Note: Since im still young(14.99 years old), This list could change over time as I get more familiar with every music piece in the classical world...One thing you can tell that i like all of Beethoven's nine symphonies is that I have a score for each one,lol _

4/4player


----------



## Hexameron

4/4player said:


> 2. Tchaikovsky's Sixth-So full of feeling!


So you finally heard this and it's now number 2 on your list? That's quite a coup d'etat for Tchaikovsky. Have you heard his 4th and 5th? These might also encroach onto your list if you love the "Pathetique" so much.


----------



## Topaz

4/4player said:


> Hmm...This is a much interesting thread..Im a symphony kind of guy..so obviously this list will be very important to me. Here's a little tidbit: Beethoven was often called "the father of symphonies".
> 
> 4/4player


Are you sure? I think you will find the "father of the symphony" was Joseph *Haydn* (1732 -1809) who wrote 104 of them. He is called this because he perfected the basic form that others copied. He also developed chamber music, so he was a pretty important man. Note that he was 77 when he died, well after* Mozart *who died in 1791. Haydn taught *Beethoven* for a short period in 1792, and he must have been familiar with some of Beethoven's later successes.

Not far out though for a 14.99 year old. We won't let you off so lightly when you turn 15.

You haven't started on *Schubert* yet. Just wait. Sheer joy awaits you. If you want a quick taster, try his Unfinished Symphony. It's perfection. Schubert was described by Artur Schnabel (famous pianist) as the "composer nearest to God". No-one is more relaxing than Schubert in my view. Utterly delectable melodist, the best.

Did you know that Beethoven, Brahms and Schubert are buried next to each other in a big cemetery in Vienna?

Topaz


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Hexameron said:


> (Tchaikovsky) Have you heard his 4th and 5th? These might also encroach onto your list if you love the "Pathetique" so much.


Not a chance. Those ones are schlock.  Just kidding.



Topaz said:


> I think you will find the "father of the symphony" was Joseph *Haydn* (1732 -1809) who wrote 104 of them.


Or *did* he? 

God I hate these lists. I can't think in well-ordered lists. But I enjoy reading other people's!


----------



## 4/4player

Damn...Not only do I have one guy on my case, I have two!,lol 

I guess my list will change at least "three" times now, since you suggested more symphonies to listen too. My Birthday is tommorow, so hopefully I get money to waste on CDs,lol...Hmm, Topaz, you may be right about Haydn. You might have a more broad scope of knowledge in classical music history, Where I certainly lack,lol ...Tchaikovsky's sixth would be number one..but ever since going to that Beethoven's Ninth concert with the Honolulu Symphony with Joann Faletta conducting...it went straight to the top of my list....Can you and Tchaikovsky forgive me?

4/4player

P.S Topaz, it was very interesting that you've said those three were buried near each other. How could you tell which grave they were in? Couldn't the gravedigger confuse one composer with the other?..hehe


----------



## IAmKing

> If you want a quick taster, try his Unfinished Symphony.


I think I performed that ages ago. One of the trumpeters at my school told the conductor she couldn't perform, the night before the concert. I was rushed in at the last minute... I seem to remember it was quite exciting. In a minor key perhaps?


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

The Unfinished is in B minor.

It is most commonly listed as Schubert's 8th symphony, but is numbert 7 and 9 in some catalogues.


----------



## robert newman

Bruckner 8th 
Schubert 3rd
Shostakovitch 15
Glazunov 4
Rachmaninov 2
Beethoven 'Pastoral'
Brahms 3
Tchaikowsky 4
Nielsen 3
Mahler 4


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

robert newman said:


> Schubert 3rd


There is no accounting for taste, and there needn't be. Everybody in the world simply likes whatever it is they like.

That said, I do respect your inclusion of Schubert 3rd on this list, *robert newman*, but I cannot understand how you rank this piece above his _Unfinished_ and _Great C major_ symphonies. What is it you like about the 3rd?


----------



## Orgel

*Omission*

I am surprised that nobody mentioned Saint-Saens' Symphony # 3, which would certainly be among my 'top ten'. Personally, I'm more into piano concerti than into symphonies.


----------



## Topaz

*Rankings*

I have updated the results based on the combined preferences of the 16 posters who have now voted. Some approximation was required where people did not rank their preferences but only listed them in any order. The numbers on the left show the rank, and where they are the same it means there was a tie.

1	BEETHOVEN 9
2	BEETHOVEN 5
3	BRAHMS 1
4	BRUCKNER 8
5	BEETHOVEN 6
5	MOZART 40
7	SHOSTAKOVICH 10
8	MAHLER 9
9	BERLIOZ SF
10	TCHAIKOVSKY 6
10	SCHUBERT 8
12	BEETHOVEN 3
13	BRAHMS 3
13	MAHLER 5
15	BEETHOVEN 7

...........

Self-evidently, Beethoven rules by a very large margin. He is by far the most popular symphonist. Brahms is next, followed by Mahler, Bruckner and then Shostakovich.

Topaz


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Beethoven's 9th
Beethoven's 3rd
Beethoven 5th
Brahms' 1st
Schubert 8th (unfinished)
Mahler's 5th
Mahler's 1st
Bruckner's 8th
Beethoven's 6th
Mozart's 41st


----------



## orquesta tipica

Here's my list, in no particular order of preference:

Prokofiev 1st
Prokofiev 5th
Shostakovich 14th
Tchaikovsky 5th
Mahler 4th
Dvorak 9th
Beethoven 9th
Sibelius 5th
Schumann 4th
Schubert 9th

I'm not saying they're the best 10, just my personal favorites.


----------



## robert newman

Dear Kurkikohtaus 

I selected Schubert's little 3rd Symphony D.200 because it, to me, captures a sort of innocence that learned works lack. Written while he was still a student it's just so full of youth and goodness. It does not attempt impossible things. It doesn't try to blow us away with power or sophistication. It remains (to me anyway) one of the most charming, life-affirming works in all of music. 'Songs of Innocence and Experience' - the idea that little Schubert here, in this work, came close to perfection. I love it dearly though it may never win any symphony competition. 

Robert


----------



## Gadi22

Brahms 3rd
Prokofiev 5th
Dvorak 7th
Schubert 8th
Mendelssohn 2nd
Beethoven 3rd
Mozart 41th
Bruckner 7th
Haydn 104th
Mahler 3rd

Not in this oreder particulary...


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Gadi22 said:


> ...
> Mendelssohn 2nd
> ...


Mendelssohn 2nd? I didn't even know that Mendelssohn _had_ a second symphony. I thought he wrote that big set of early string symphonies and then jumped directly to the 3rd!

Honestly though, why Mendelssohn 2nd over the 4th, 5th, or even 3rd? Come on! Those ones have _names_, dude. That must mean they're good.


----------



## Topaz

Kurkikohtaus said:


> Mendelssohn 2nd? I didn't even know that Mendelssohn _had_ a second symphony. I thought he wrote that big set of early string symphonies and then jumped directly to the 3rd!
> 
> Honestly though, why Mendelssohn 2nd over the 4th, 5th, or even 3rd? Come on! Those ones have _names_, dude. That must mean they're good.


From wikipedia:

_In 1840 Mendelssohn wrote the choral Symphony No. 2 in B flat Major, entitled Lobgesang (Hymn of Praise), and this score was published in 1841._​
I don't know this symphony. My favorite is No 5 Reformation.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

There are *three reasons *I often question the inclusion of "weird" pieces into these types of lists.

The first is that there are some people who might not know (for example) Mendelssohn's Italian Symphony, but have heard the 2nd somewhere (I know, strange, but it can happen). I try to guide these people to the canon.

The second are people that consciously ignore the cannon and choose lesser known works as a point of snobbery or to try to make themselves look more intelligent than the rest of us n00bs. I hate these people, they should be lined up and shot, begining with that one Oisfit or whatever.

The third reason is that some people have very good reasons and very good answers. A few posts up *robert newman* explained his liking of Schubert 3rd over the 8th and 9th. His answer was actually inspiring to me in a way, and more answers like this might help us rediscover little gems that we have forgotten.


----------



## Topaz

I can very easily connect with Robert’s touching comments about Schubert’s Symphony No 3. Although it is a less well-known work, it is still very nice indeed. Personally, I prefer all of these early Schubert symphonies to any of Haydn’s and to many of Mozart’s. Only Mozart’s 39, 40, 41 are possibly better in my view. But I prefer Schubert’s 8 (Unfinished) and 9 (Great) to any of the latter, and in my opinion the second movement of the Unfinished Symphony is about as good as it gets.

Schubert, of course, was a very high class composer (better than Wagner!) and especially puts to shame all the mere minnows whose names crop up here (and on other threads) from time to time. What I really love about Schubert, more than anything, is his brilliant turn of speed, change of emotion, key changes, all wrapped up in the most beautiful melody and clever orchestration. I understand that, sometimes, even when writing quite complex pieces, he would not even bother testing out his themes/melodies on the piano; instead he would simply work it all out in his head, play it through by tapping his fingers on his desk and then write it out. 

BTW, I like the idea of snobbish posters getting "shot" for putting up daft posts. That’s a brilliant suggestion, and I thoroughly endorse your view there Kurki. So if you get the boot from this site for saying that I just wanna tell we’ll go together again, to pastures new.


----------



## CelloPrincess04

In no order:

Beethoven 7
Sibelius 1
Sibelius 7
Sibelius 6
Sibelius 5
Mozart 25
Mozart 36
Beethoven 1
Brahms 1
Shostakovich 9


----------



## Topaz

Rankings

I have updated the results up to rank 15 of the combined preferences of the *20 posters *who have now voted. The numbers on the left show the rank, and where they are the same it means there was a tie.

1	BEETHOVEN 9
2	BEETHOVEN 5
3	BRAHMS 1
4	BEETHOVEN 3
5	SCHUBERT 8 
6	BRUCKNER 8
7	BEETHOVEN 6
8	MOZART 40
9	BRAHMS 3
10	SHOSTAKOVICH 10
10	MAHLER 5
12	MAHLER 9
13	BERLIOZ SF
14	TCHAIKOVSKY 6
15	BEETHOVEN 7
15 SIBELIUS 5

........

There are some surprises to me. The main ones are:


Dvorak 9 is not here, it's at no 17
Tchaikovsky 6 is so low
Mozart 41 is not here, it's well down the list (the very low rating of Mozart generally is remarkable)
Schubert 9 is not here, it's at 33
Brahms 4 is not here, it's at 22

P.S. The biggest non surprise: Tchaikovsky Manfred Symphony not here. But see what's at rank 13!


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Topaz, thanks for extending the list down to #15 instead of just 10. Did you do that for me?

Also, yes, it is interesting that Mozart is so under-represented... could it be because the vote is spread out among various symphonies? If you took all the Mozart votes and piled them into one, how much higher would he go?
_____________________________________________
Last but not least, I will endulge in a little anecdote from my sad life for anyone that cares. I get e-mail notifications of posts that I'm subscribed to, with the content of the quote included as well. The post I got in my inbox was CelloPrincess', with no less that *4 Sibelius Symphonies!* Needless to say I got very excited, I had my recruiting speech all planned and ready to go... when I opened the post and saw her lovely avatar... I realized...

Welcome to the forum, Aloipat.


----------



## Topaz

*Kurkikohtaus: *I guessed before you did that you and Celloprincess may possibly be acquainted through other channels.

To answer your question about ranks based on *all symphonies for each composer*, this is what I get from the 20 voters thus far, showing the % of votes cast (e.g. for all Beethoven symphonies he got 23% of all votes):

BEETHOVEN	23
MAHLER	10
BRAHMS	9
BRUCKNER	7
MOZART	5
TCHAIKOVSKY	5
SCHUBERT	5
SHOSTAKOVICH	5
SIBELIUS	5
DVORAK	4
PROKOFIEV	3
LISZT	3
BERLIOZ	2
HAYDN	2
VAUGHN WILLIAMS	2
NEILSON	2
RACHMANINOFF	1
IVES	1
SCHUMANN	1
OTHER	7
TOTAL	100

......


The problems with the above are (i) sample size is still very small, (ii) it is a self-selecting sample, (iii) some of the latest votes could be influenced by past results for tactical purposes, (iv) many voters did not rank their selections but this is not an insuperable problem.

Given these major caveats, the astonishing lead of Beethoven is remarkable, but not surprising (at least not to me). His symphonies are so incredibly good and they contain amazing diversity, and yet all clearly containing the Beethoven "stamp".

I'm not that surprised Mozart is not more highly rated. Apart from 39-41, the basic style style seems too thin for many modern tastes, where a lusher Romantic flavour is clearly preferred.

Sibelius is deservedly up there in some very good company.

It doesn't surprise me that Haydn is well down, even though he wrote 104 symphonies.

I am surprised Schumann is well down.


----------



## CelloPrincess04

Kurkikohtaus said:


> Last but not least, I will endulge in a little anecdote from my sad life for anyone that cares. I get e-mail notifications of posts that I'm subscribed to, with the content of the quote included as well. The post I got in my inbox was CelloPrincess', with no less that *4 Sibelius Symphonies!* Needless to say I got very excited, I had my recruiting speech all planned and ready to go... when I opened the post and saw her lovely avatar... I realized...
> 
> Welcome to the forum, Aloipat.


haha, thanks!  and I wouldn't place your life at being sad for this exciting you because my ability to get excited over small things would most likely rival yours.


----------



## Topaz

Kurki: I hope you haven't been vote-rigging, getting all your mates from the Sibelius Forum to vote for Sibelius symphonies. This is a proper scientific study we're pursuing here, you know. I was hoping to present the results to the Royal Statistical Society soon, in the expectation of achieving a gold award for a major contribution to music research for this Forum. If they find out the numbers have been cooked we'll all for be for it. They could shut this place down in a flash. And accomplices, no matter how angelic they may appear playing a cello, will not be let off scot-free. It's 6 months "community service" - as our penal system in the UK euphemistically calls it, i.e. cleaning graffiti off public buildings - at least, for this kind of thing.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Topaz said:


> It's 6 months "community service" - as our penal system in the UK euphemistically calls it, i.e. cleaning graffiti off public buildings - at least, for this kind of thing.


Man, you UK boys have it easy. In a similar poll among Czech orchestral musicians, a small faction of rebels who were purporting that Bruckner and not Dvorak is Schubert's true heir had to serve drinks all night at the Dvorak Society's annual "There Are Other Composers?" banquet.


----------



## Gadi22

Dear Kurkikohtaus,

About your question of the Mendelssohn 2nd,
I heard all of his symphonies and even the 1st one wich is really not known, and as a clarinetist who wish to be a professional Orchestra player I'm hearing to every several Orchestra piece that exist. (Right now I'm hearing Kodaly Pieces... Damn! That Hungarians know how to right..)

And of course the 3rd-5th are also great sympnoies,
But the second is so special in his structure, and the awsome chorale parts and soloist there. The second chapter of the Symphony is for me one of the Most beautiful melody ever written in that genre. Mendelssohn as he is a very good melody writter.

There is also a Tenor "aria" in the 4th part wich is a develloped chorale/Soloist part, its really heart breaking for me. ("Saget es" and then "Er zahlet unser Tranen").

And for you, I'm not trying to be a snob, and I'm not going to put all the analysing of this symphony to prove it's better. I listened and played thouse symphonies, and I'm connecting the most to the second. What can I do.
But before you say anything about this symphony, hear it. It really worth the hour for this.

Have a nice day!
Gadi.


----------



## Explorer-8

This is very difficult because I may feel differently another time in the future and then different again after that. This is my top ten just for this moment; one of which became one of my favourites only yesterday.

1. Mahler - no 10
2. Mahler - no 8
3. Mahler - no 3
4. Bruckner - no 8
5. Bruckner - no 7
6. Shostakovich - no 8
7. Mahler - no 4
8. Shostakovich - no 5
9. Shostakovich - no 4
10. Mahler - no 9


----------



## Explorer-8

*Britten*

I've just realised that I missed out Britten's Sinfonia Da Requiem, but I'll have to leave that for another time. I have posted my top ten and it's too late to take anything out now.


----------



## fear sneachta ban

Well I've done enough browsing and now it's time to come out from under my stone.

1. Beethoven 3
2. Beethoven 9
3. Brahms 4
4. Mahler 9
5. Mozart 41
6. Shostakovich 5
7. Dvorak 9
8. Brahms 1
9. Saint-Sans 3
10. Liszt Dante


----------



## Topaz

*Explorer:* why not change your list if you like? Same for anyone else who's had further thoughts.

*fear sneachta ban:* It's about time someone mentioned Saint-Saens Organ Symphony. It must contain one of the most inspired movements of the whole lot. I would have included this symphony if the list had been for 20, not 10. I found it very difficult confining myself to just 10, and could have put in 50 very easily in a very rough order of preference.

I'm slightly puzzled why Schubert's 9th isn't featured a bit more strongly in these votes. I can see why some people may not care for it as they have a preference for later works (Mahler etc), but for those whose interests are mainly Mozart/Beethoven era I would have thought that this is worthy of inclusion. When Robert Schumann discovered this work some 10 years after Schubert's death, he was bowled over by its splendour and magnificence and arranged for Mendelssohn to give it a first public airing as conductor of the famous Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra.

To be fair to Mozart, I'm also surprised that S 39, 41 are not more popular. These contain some really splendid movements, and demonstrate remarkable ability.

None of this is to suggest that other symphonies on people's lists are not good too.

We are up to 22 sets of votes now. Anyone not yet voted, or anyone who wants to change their mind? I will re-calculate once we get to 25. The votes by composer (across all symphonies) are as interesting as the top symphonies themselves. See posts 58 and 60 for the latest set of results.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Topaz said:


> I'm slightly puzzled why Schubert's 9th isn't featured a bit more strongly in these votes.


In the great C major Symphony we see Schubert as Bruckner's harbinger, or to go a little further, Bruckner stripped down to its purest essence (i.e. without all the crap).


----------



## ChamberNut

Here are my Top 10 symphonies (excluding Beethoven's). Beethoven's symphonies are simply the best and would overpower my top 10, so you can pretty much add 5 Beethoven's symphonies into this list. (I'll add them below)

My favorite 10 symphonies, not necessarily in perfect order (excluding LvB's)

1 - Brahms - 1st
2 - Berlioz - Symphonie fantastique
3 - Bruckner - 5th
4 - Dvorak - 8th
5 - Mahler - 1st
6 - Mozart - 40th
7 - Mozart - 41st
8 - Dvorak - 7th
9 - Brahms - 4th
10 - Mendelssohn - 'Italian' 4th

and now my favorite 5 Beethoven symphonies (although I thorougly enjoy all 9!)

1 - The 9th
2 - 7th
3 - 'Eroica' 3rd
4 - 'Pastoral' 6th
5 - 5th


----------



## Topaz

*Chambernut *- I presume you are saying that Brahms 1 takes 6th position after the Beethoven symphonies?


----------



## ChamberNut

Topaz said:


> *Chambernut *- I presume you are saying that Brahms 1 takes 6th position after the Beethoven symphonies?


No, I'd probably place Brahms No. 1 in 3rd place, after symphony # 7. But for sure all 5 Beethoven symphonies would be in my Top 10 overall of favorites.

I still have many composers for which I have not yet had a chance to listen to their symphonies thoroughly. In particular, Schubert, Mendelssohn and Schumann I'm interested in delving into next.


----------



## opus67

Poor Mozart. Writing his 50 odd symphonies and he barely gets any vote.  That's actually surprising.


----------



## ChamberNut

opus67 said:


> Poor Mozart. Writing his 50 odd symphonies and he barely gets any vote.  That's actually surprising.


I got 2 of them in mine. There'd probably be another 2 in a Top 20, those being # 25 and # 39.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Chamber nut, nice to see 2 Dvorak Symphonies on your list. Just out of curiosity, what do you like more about Dvorak #7 and #8 than about #9, which does not appear on your list?


----------



## ChamberNut

Kurkikohtaus said:


> Chamber nut, nice to see 2 Dvorak Symphonies on your list. Just out of curiosity, what do you like more about Dvorak #7 and #8 than about #9, which does not appear on your list?


I like them almost equally. It's so hard to make Top 10 lists sometimes, because you are excluding works that you really enjoy, like in my case, Dvorak's # 9.

My reasoning to exclude it in my list and instead go with # 7 and # 8 is simply to acknowledge # 7 and # 8 as great symphonies. They are constantly overshadowed by the # 9 symphony. I saw a live performance of Symphony # 7, and it was thrilling!


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

A curious little tidbit of trivia about Dvorak #7 is that there is a long-standing tradition in the Czech lands, dating back to who-knows-when, that makes the powerful ending of this symphony even more thrilling.

The second violins and some winds have an interesting chromatic line for 4 bars just before the closing chords. This line is rarely heard, as it is obscured by the heavy and loud held notes in the brass. When Czech orchestras play this, one or both trumpet players double this line instead of playing their long held notes. I'm not sure what Dvorak would have thought of this, but the effect is quite good.


----------



## Explorer-8

*Vaughan-Williams*

I can't remember seeing any of Vaughan-Williams' symphonies in people's top ten. Although I love the Sinfonia Antarctica and the Sea symphony, they don't quite make it into my top ten. It's so competitive up there in the top ten.


----------



## MarkLV

1. Beethoven's 5th - the *ultimate* symphony. No other work can match the power of this majestic masterpiece. Amazing.
2. Beethoven's 9th - if the 5th is the ultimate symphony, the 9th is the greatest. The culmination of Beethoven's creative genius.
3. Beethoven's 3rd - An explosion of dynamic genius. The first mature Beethoven symphony and also the first to shatter the old symphonic structure and make the symphony into a dynamic, living, musical form, which can be moulded to suit the creativity of the composer.
4. Tchaikovsky's 6th - if Beethoven's 5th is the ultimate of all symphonies, then this one is the ultimate romantic masterpiece. The apex of romantic music, the embodiment of human tragedy expressed in musical form. An emotionally devastating work.
5. Brahms' 1st. Initially mocked as 'Beethoven's 10th', this work was the first truly great symphony after Beethoven. Brahms at the height of his powers.
6. Brahms' 4th. The culmination of the composer's creativity. Simply a great, romantic, symphony, with a hint of nostalgia and pathos.
7. Schubert's 8th (Unfinished). The first truly romantic symphony, and also the first genuinely tragic symphony. Brief, beautiful and deeply moving.
8. Mozart's 40th. Mozart's most beautiful symphony. Probably the first symphony to openly express human sorrow; a romantic work in classical structure.
9. Rachmaninov's 2nd. The last great romantic symphony. Full of the composer's nostalgic longings and wonderfully luscious melodies. His greatest work and one of the gems of romantic music.
10. Dvorak's 9th. A superbly melodic masterpiece, rich in musical creativity and supremely well crafted.


----------



## inaesh

not in order
Haydn "surprise"
Mozart No40 41
beethoven NO3 6 7 8 9
schbert No 8
tchaikovsky No5,6
Mahler No 7,8,9
Dvorak No 9,my favorite


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

A few small notes to begin with:



Explorer-8 said:


> I can't remember seeing any of Vaughan-Williams' symphonies in people's top ten...


Not in my top 10, but I like VW 5th a lot for all those pleasant Pastoral qualities it is know for. I especially like it after listening to the unpleasant 4th...



inaesh said:


> Haydn "surprise"
> ... Mahler No 7,8,9


I never would have thought that someone who actually likes Mahler's 7th would put it on the same list as Haydn's Surprise Symphony, which to me, is incredibly boring after that bang in the second movment.

And now the big one:



MarkLV said:


> 1. Beethoven's 5th - the *ultimate* symphony. No other work can match the power of this majestic masterpiece. Amazing.


Taking nothing away from Beethoven's 5th, which is powerful and majestic, as you say, but it is certainly *not* the "*ultimate*" symphony. For something to be "*ultimate*", it must be the culmination or at least an embodiment of a certain set of criteria, as we often talk about in other "best" threads.

So here is my one overriding criterium for what makes a great symphony:

*Unity*.

Specifically, *Motivic* and *Harmonic* and *Expressive* unity within and across movements, achieved either by varied repetition and development of similar elements or by the skillful juxtaposition of disparate elements.

So Beethoven's 5th is not the "ultimate" symphony, but it certainly is the Harbinger of this type of symphonic writing, it is the symphony that laid down the gauntlet for the rest of the century and beyond, showing what The Symphony as an Art Form must be. The bridge from the 3rd to the 4th movement and the return of the 3rd mvmt material in the Finale are the beginning of something that led through Schubert, Brahms, Dvorak and finally to Sibelius.

But to say that it is the "Ultimate" means in a way that it is the End, that composers had nowhere else to go after this, and that is misrepresentitive, taking away from its true calling... It is the beginning!


----------



## opus67

I don't think I can even give you a complete list. I'm not including Beethoven, because all of them are good (understatement of the century!), Mozart and Haydn, because there's just too many of them! But I think there's one of Haydn's I like - #94, I think it is.

Anyway on to my "list" (in no particular order):

Schubert 8th
I would also include his 5th if it weren't for the feeling I get, that he plagiarised, musically, whenever I listen to it. 
Saint-Saens #3
Tchaikovsky #4
Dvorak #9

 You can't even call that is a list! You could probably add 8th of Dvorak's. I got to listen to a lot more.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

*opus67*, Topaz is trying to compile a running list (or is it in another thread?), so please DO list the Beethoven's if they are your favourites.

What piece does Schubert's 5th remind you of?

--- Edit ---

_Indeed, Topaz updates this thread every now and then with the latest total, so post your Beethovens so that they are recognized!_


----------



## opus67

Okay, here's a top 10 as of 06/02/'07:


LvB #6 and #9 (it's a tie for the top spot)
LvB 5th
Dvorak 9th
LvB 7th
Schubert 8th
Mendelssohn 4th (forgot to add this in my earlier post)
Tchaikovsky 4th
Saint-Saens #3

So, will the 10th symphony be LvB's 8th, 3rd or Dvorak's 8th? I'm not really sure. And they may not necessarily take the 10th spot.

Regarding Schubert's, it sounds a lot like WAM's style, no work in particular.


----------



## toughcritic

Tchaikovsky 4th.


----------



## MarkLV

I maintain that Beethoven's 5th *is* the ultimate symphony - and I do not wish to engage in a pointless academic discussion about the structure of the symphony etc. It is the iconic, quintessential symphony and it will remain so forever. End of the discussion.


----------



## ChamberNut

MarkLV said:


> I maintain that Beethoven's 5th *is* the ultimate symphony - and I do not wish to engage in a pointless academic discussion about the structure of the symphony etc. It is the iconic, quintessential symphony and it will remain so forever. End of the discussion.


I respect your opinion Mark. And certainly, in my opinion, Beethoven's 5th Symphony is a wonderful symphony.

My personal choice for the "Ultimate Symphony" though would have to be Beethoven's 9th.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

MarkLV said:


> I maintain that Beethoven's 5th *is* the ultimate symphony ... It is the iconic, quintessential symphony and it will remain so forever.


Here is a dictionary definition of the word "*Ultimate*"
1. last; furthest or farthest; ending a process or series
2. maximum; decisive; conclusive 
3. basic; fundamental; *representing a limit beyond which further progress is impossible*

Again, *MarkLV*, the problem is not that you personally consider Beethoven's 5th to be the greatest symphony. The problem is in the word you chose to describe it. Does this work represent a limit beyond which further progress is impossible? Of course not. It's rightful place in the history of the symphony is the groundbreaker that showed the importance of connecting movements thematically, not as the last of a line beyond which no progress could be made.

Either we are going to have intelligent discussion here that enriches our experience of music, or we're just going to throw around meaningless superlatives like American television commercials.


----------



## MarkLV

By using the word 'ultimate' I was not trying to give a specific meaning to my definition of the symphony, but to highlight its sheer magnificence. Maybe the 9th fits the definition of 'ultimate' more accurately, though I prefer to choose the 5th. I don't see the point of discussing this to death. The point I am trying to make is that this work is the quintessential symphonic masterpiece, and so it will remain. It has a personal meaning for me as well, as it was the very first classical piece I ever heard - on my parent's record player.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Here is a definition of *quintessence*:
_1. The pure, highly concentrated essence of a thing.
2. The purest or most typical instance: the quintessence of evil._​
I agree 100%, Beethoven's 5th is indeed by this definition the quintessential symphony, which is however something completely different than the _ultimate_ symphony.

I think we've reached an agreement here.

By the way, the reason "quint" is in that word is:

_3. In ancient and medieval philosophy, the fifth and highest essence after the four elements of earth, air, fire, and water, thought to be the substance of the heavenly bodies and latent in all things.​_


----------



## MungoPark

*In no particular order*

Schubert's no. 9
Mozart's no 1, no 5, no 31, and no 41
Rachmaninov no. 1
Dvorak no 9
Beethoven nos 5 
Haydn no. 88
saint-Georges Symphony in D, op. 11:2


----------



## Lisztfreak

I was wondering which Bruckner symphonies do you consider best? Could you recommend me some? I've heard only the no.9, and it's a bit too... I don't know... threatening, or huge, I'm not sure about the right word.


----------



## ChamberNut

Lisztfreak said:


> I was wondering which Bruckner symphonies do you consider best? Could you recommend me some? I've heard only the no.9, and it's a bit too... I don't know... threatening, or huge, I'm not sure about the right word.


To listen to Bruckner and Mahler, I have to be in the right mood for some reason.

Requires alot of patience and headphones to listen to their symphonies, since there are many quiet moments, I find.

I love Bruckner's 4th and 5th symphonies. And the Scherzo 2nd movement to Symphony No. 9 is fantastic! I have the complete Bruckner symphonies conducted by Eugen Jochum.


----------



## Lisztfreak

Thanks, I'll try the nos. 4 & 5.


----------



## genieman123

i can't believe you didn't put Dvorak's New World Symphony in your list!


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Bruckner 4th is definitely the most accessible, but while I like the 5th, someone new to Bruckner might be turned off by the ever-present polyphony and lack of the "big tune".

If you like the 4th, I suggest moving directly to the 8th, which is big-bad-daddy-Bruckner at his most threatening, his obscene grandiousness comes to the fore in all its brutal magnificence.


----------



## Keemun

Here are my current favorite symphonies.

 1. Beethoven 9 
2. Mahler 2
3. Sibelius 2
4. Mahler 9
5. Beethoven 3
6. Mahler 5
7. Tchaikovsky 6
8. Brahms 4
9. Beethoven 5
10. Sibelius 5


----------



## Guest

Berlioz Romeo and Juliet
Mahler 6
Ives 4
Nielsen 6
Penderecki 1
Martinu 6
Lutoslawski 3
Norgard 5
Corcoran 4
Dhomont Frankenstein Symphony

Roughly (meaning I didn't check) chronological. And only one per composer. Except for Penderecki, whose subsequent symphonies are from after he turned to the dark side, and Dhomont, who only wrote one, I like all the other symphonies these people wrote. If I had another ten, I could put some Bruckner and Schubert and Beethoven and Gubaidulina and Schnittke and Shostakovich and Stravinsky and Haydn and, above all, some Prokofiev up there, too. (Anyone know Piston's 2nd? Sweet! But get Schwarz's not Tilson Thomas's. (Naxos has rereleased the Schwarz on their American Classics series.)


----------



## 20centrfuge

Sibelius 5
Prokofiev 6
Barber 1
Nielsen 4
Tchaikovsky 5
Sibelius 2
Dvorak 9
Shostakovich 10
Adams Harmonielehre
Prokofiev 3


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

*Some Guy*, I mean no offence by this, but may I ask if you are British?

The reason I ask is that I have met many British musicians at various masterclasses throughout my studies, and it always seems that they are champions of the lesser known works...


----------



## Guest

I've been asked that before, and I always take it as a compliment. What self-respecting Anglophile would take it any other way!

No, I was born in Northern California and spent most of my 55 years in Southern California. I do read a lot and have travelled a bit; can't be bad.

I listen to a lot of music. I know that some of the things I like best are lesser known, but I must confess I don't have a really good sense of that. I know these things very well, as do some of my friends. If championing them leads to more people listening to them, then I'm all for that!


----------



## Kesiak

HI. My currently favourites:

Tchaikovsky: Symphony 6
Tchaikovsky: Symphony 5
Tchaikovsky: Symphony 4
Beethoven: Symphony 5
Beethoven: Symphony 9
Sibelius: Symphony 2
Sibelius: Symphony 5
Shostakovich: Symphony 5
Shostakovich: Symphony 8
Dvorak: Symphony 8


----------



## Handel

A thread who delivers....

The symphonies I like very much

Haydn nos 8, 48, 86, 88, 98, 99, 102 (Actually, most of his production)
Beethoven nos 2, 3, 5
Schubert no 9

And in a somewhat lesser category 

Mozart no 41
Kraus (symphony in C minor - VB 142)
J. C. Bach, op. 18 no 1.
Michael Haydn P26.


----------



## Eric

right now I've been in to (in alphabetical order):

Beethoven 9
Brahms 4
Dvorak 9
Mahler 5
Tchaikovsky 4
Tchaikovsky 5
Tchaikovsky 6

and, i'm afraid, I actually do not own many symphonies, or classical albums, for that matter. I only have about 17 classical albums, music is rather expensive sometimes...


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

Another opportunity to respond in countdown format(!)

10. *Schubert 8 "Unfinished"*- the world's best known fragmentary symphony.
9. *Berlioz "Symphonie Fantastique"*- The most famous "single-essay-into-genre" symphony.
8. *Mahler 9*- A symphony that is "like the world," and yet has at its conclusion a view of the end of the mortal coil.
7. *Bruckner 8*- A "cathedral in sound" more memorable than Chartes.
6. *Beethoven 5*- Don't make _your_ list without it. 
5. *Bruckner 5*- My nominee for "most underrated" symphony. Also, if I could do the "Gilbert Kaplan" and conduct a "one-off," it would be for this cyclic masterwork. 
4. *Dvorak 9 "New World"*- Maybe the most trans-national epic in music.
3. *Beethoven 9*- The symphony that brought the human voice into focus, no other "choral" symphony has yet matched its level.
2. *Mahler 5*- Mahler's most tautly constructed monument.
1. *Beethoven 7*- Wagner's famous description of this as "the apotheosis of the dance" renders my feelings, though the final three words are superfluous.


----------



## Saturnus

................................


----------



## Joe_

I am new to classical, but these are my favorites. 

Beethoven 9th
Mahler 9th
Allan Pettersson 7th
Dvorak 9th
Tchaikovsky 6th
Mahler 6th
Allan Pettersson 6th
Beethoven 5th
Beethoven 3rd
Beethoven 6th


----------



## Saturnus

Kurkikohtaus said:


> A curious little tidbit of trivia about Dvorak #7 is that there is a long-standing tradition in the Czech lands, dating back to who-knows-when, that makes the powerful ending of this symphony even more thrilling.
> 
> The second violins and some winds have an interesting chromatic line for 4 bars just before the closing chords. This line is rarely heard, as it is obscured by the heavy and loud held notes in the brass. When Czech orchestras play this, one or both trumpet players double this line instead of playing their long held notes. I'm not sure what Dvorak would have thought of this, but the effect is quite good.


It's like the chromatic oboe line in the second movement of Tchaikovsky's 6th. Rarely heard but stunningly beautiful. I heard it first on a recording with the National Russian orchestra, the fourth recording I bought of that piece!
Do you know of any recordings with this Czech tradition?


----------



## Zombie Woof

Hi all,
I haven't been here for some time, I thought it was time to correct that.

My favourite symphonies are always subject to seasonal and mood-motivated variations, but right now the list would look something like, in no particular order of preference, this:

Schubert 9th
Brahms 4th
Dvorak 8th
Mozart 41st
Mahler 5th
Sibelius 2nd
Sibelius 5th
Beethoven 6th
Hindemith Mathis der Maler
Nielsen 5th 

All best wishes,
Zombie Woof


----------



## Leporello87

Nice list!

Welcome back to the forum, Zombie


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Saturnus said:


> Do you know of any recordings with this Czech tradition?












In this recording, the first trumpet also doubles the _ff_ statement of the main theme in the first movement. In my opinion, that's a little much, but the end of the finale is nice.


----------



## silmarillion

Thought I'd drop off my list here:

1) Beethoven - 9th Symphony (The king of kings for me thus far)
2) Mozart - 25th Symphony (An old favorite)
3) Beethoven - 7th Symphony
4) Brahms - 1st Symphony 
5) Sibelius - 2nd Symphony (Both this and Brahms are recent discoveries)
6) Bizet - 1st Symphony (hardly titanic, but it's got a very fresh air)
7) Mahler - 4th Symphony
8) Shostakovich - 5th Symphony 
9) Dvorak - 9th Symphony 
10) Beethoven - 5th Symphony

Bit of a cliche list I suppose

Silmarillion


----------



## Handel

silmarillion said:


> Thought I'd drop off my list here:
> 
> 1) Beethoven - 9th Symphony (The king of kings for me thus far)
> 2) Mozart - 25th Symphony (An old favorite)
> 3) Beethoven - 7th Symphony
> 4) Brahms - 1st Symphony
> 5) Sibelius - 2nd Symphony (Both this and Brahms are recent discoveries)
> 6) Bizet - 1st Symphony (hardly titanic, but it's got a very fresh air)
> 7) Mahler - 4th Symphony
> 8) Shostakovich - 5th Symphony
> 9) Dvorak - 9th Symphony
> 10) Beethoven - 5th Symphony
> 
> Bit of a cliche list I suppose
> 
> Silmarillion


If you like Beethoven symphonies, I sincerely suggest to discover those by Haydn. At least the "London symphonies" no 93-104. They are quite different of Beethoven output, but a bit similar too (especially the earlier ones).


----------



## alan sheffield

*What? No Beethoven!*

1) Walton 1st 
2) Nielsen 5th
3) Shostakovich 4th
4) Vaughan Williams 6th
5) Sibelius 7th
6) Malcolm Arnold 5th
7) Roussel 3rd
8) Robert Simpson 3rd
9) Nielsen 4th
10) Tippett 2nd


----------



## alan sheffield

*Correction*

How could I forget Samuel Barber's First Symphony so something has to go

1) Walton 1st 
2) Nielsen 5th
3) Shostakovich 4th
4) Vaughan Williams 6th
5) Sibelius 7th
6) Malcolm Arnold 5th
7) Roussel 3rd
8) Robert Simpson 3rd
9) Samuel Barber 1st
10) Tippett 2nd


----------



## Lisztfreak

Tippett?! Where to get Tippett's symphonies?! It's such a rare fare... Could you suggest me some labels?


----------



## alan sheffield

This link http://www.amazon.com/Tippett-Symphonies-Michael/dp/B000AV621U

is worth exploring. I haven't heard these versions but the value for money is amazing. This collection of all his major works also looks very tempting:
http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Decca/4756750


----------



## Lisztfreak

Thanks!


----------



## David C Coleman

Of the Symphonies I've heard my fav. 10 I would say are ; -

Bruckner 8
Beethoven 3
Mozart 40
Mozart 41
Beethoven 6
Mahler 5
Shostokovich 5
Schubert 9
Schubert 8
Tchaikovsky 6

But that does tend to change sometimes at different times


----------



## Ephemerid

Roughly in order:

Shostakovich 10
Stravinsky: Symphony of Psalms
Beethoven 6 (a sentimental favourite)
Debussy La Mer (I know not technically, but it was his answer to the Germanic tradition)
Gorecki 3
Copland 3
Stravinsky: Symphony in C 
Mozart 41
Beethoven 5
Prokofiev 1

~ josh


----------



## Rondo

These are not in any particular order...

Shostakovich 11
Mahler 6
Mahler 9
Beethoven 4
Prokofiev 7
Tchaikovsky 6
Dvorak 9
Rorem 3
Nielsen 5
Arnold 5


----------



## World Violist

I'll go backwards:

10) Beethoven 5
9) Mahler 1
8) Sibelius 6
7) Beethoven 9
6) Tchaikovsky 6
5) Mahler 9
4) Sibelius 3
3) Sibelius 7
2) Mahler 6
1) Mahler 2


----------



## SamGuss

Beethoven 5, 6, 7 & 9
Dvorak 8 & 9
Mahler 1, 2 & 5
Brahms 1


----------



## SamGuss

A revised list:

10. Brahms No. 1
9. Dvorak No. 7
8. Beethoven No. 5
7. Sibelius No. 2
6. Mahler No. 8
5. Beethoven No. 3
4. Mahler No. 5
3. Shostakovich No. 7
2. Mahler No. 2
1. Dvorak No. 9


----------



## World Violist

It seems I've started a trend.

10) Sibelius 2
9) Mahler 1
8) Sibelius 6
7) Beethoven 9
6) Tchaikovsky 6
5) Mahler 9
4) Sibelius 3
3) Sibelius 7
2) Mahler 6
1) Mahler 2

Yeah, so I only changed one symphony... oh well, maybe next time.


----------



## SamGuss

World Violist said:


> It seems I've started a trend.


But it's a great trend!


----------



## Badinerie

Well...today its

Honegger Symphony no 1 
Stravinsky Symphony in C 
Vaughan Williams no 7 
Bruckner's 7th 
Sibelius 2nd 
Haydn 6th
Beethoven no 8
Malcolm Arnold no 3
Arthur Bliss "A Colour Symphony"
Mozart no 39

I does change with my moods!


----------



## ChamberNut

In alphabetical order:

Beethoven 7th
Beethoven 6th
Beethoven 3rd
Berlioz - Symphonie fantastique
Brahms 1st
Bruckner 8th
Bruckner 5th
Mozart 40th
Schubert 9th
Schumann 2nd


----------



## World Violist

I'm still sticking with my reverse order method!

10) Brahms 1
9) Mahler 1
8) Beethoven 9
7) Dvorak 9
6) Tchaikovsky 6
5) Mahler 9
4) Sibelius 6
3) Mahler 6
2) Sibelius 7
1) Mahler 2

I'm getting back to Sibelius, hence the higher-ranking Symphonies.


----------



## oisfetz

Well, at this moment I think on:
Tchaikovsky Manfred (IMHO is a symphony)
Tchaik.6th.
Balakireff first
Saint-Saëns third
Gliere third "Ilya Mouravets"
Shosta.7th.
Kalinikoff first
Borodin second
Rimsky-Korsakoff second "Antar"
Rachmaninoff first
If any of you think that I'm a fanatic of russian music, you are right. I am.


----------



## Bach

The greatest symphonic work is surely Beethoven's 3rd. I wouldn't consider that to be debatable.


----------



## oisfetz

That's democracy and toleration!. But it's not an opinion. You've
find the final solution of the question.


----------



## World Violist

Bach said:


> The greatest symphonic work is surely Beethoven's 3rd. I wouldn't consider that to be debatable.


ONE of... To each his own.


----------



## Bach

I must say though, Schumann's 4th is underrated. Some really excellent writing going on there.


----------



## BuddhaBandit

I'm not sure I've answered this thread, so here goes:

1. Beethoven's 3rd (yes, Bach, it's just an opinion, but it's my opinion, too!)
2. Mahler's 9th
3. Brahms' 4th
4. Sibelius' 5th
5. Bruckner's 5th
6. Schumann's 3rd
7. Shostakovich' 7th
8. Ives' 4th
9. Schubert's 9th

This is just a rough list... open to edits. And hey! No composer repeats!


----------



## petel

Hello, this is my first post here, because a top10 is the easiest thing to write

1. Beethoven's 9th
2. Beethoven's 5th
3. Borodin's 2nd
4. Schubert's 3rd
5. Schubert's 5th
6. Mendelssohn's 4th
7. Mozart's 40th
8. Schubert's Unfinished
9. Berlioz's symphonie fantastique
10. Beethoven's 2nd


----------



## opus67

petel said:


> Hello, this is my first post here,


Welcome aboard, petel!



> because a top10 is the easiest thing to write


Hm. How long have you been listening to classical music?  If you'd like a challenge, there's a thread here which requires you line-up all your favourite numbered symphonies 1 through 9, *without repeating composers*.


----------



## Lisztfreak

Time to update my list, I think.  Don't take the numbers literally. They may change in an instant. In fact, as I write, too.

1. Walton's 1st - this one's pretty firm
2. Shostakovich's 8th
3. Beethoven's 5th - seriously, although it is a cliché
4. Sibelius' 5th
5. Bruckner's 7th
6. Tchaikovsky's 5th
7. Elgar's 1st
8. Nielsen's 3rd
9. Schumann's 4th
10. Méhul's 1st

Ha! I even made it without repeating the composers! Who'd say...


----------



## Rachovsky

oisfetz said:


> Well, at this moment I think on:
> Tchaikovsky Manfred (IMHO is a symphony)
> Tchaik.6th.
> Balakireff first
> Saint-Saëns third
> Gliere third "Ilya Mouravets"
> Shosta.7th.
> Kalinikoff first
> Borodin second
> Rimsky-Korsakoff second "Antar"
> Rachmaninoff first
> If any of you think that I'm a fanatic of Russian music, you are right. I am.


Russian Music has to be my favorite sub-genre of classical music as well. When I play some Rachmaninoff or Mussorgsky on piano, my mom shudders and says its depressing and scary. I love the dark, deep, ginormous chords that the Russian composers tend to use.


----------



## BuddhaBandit

Lisztfreak said:


> 1. Walton's 1st - this one's pretty firm


That's a GREAT symphony that isn't as famous as some of the other "top-10ers" in this thread. However, it's probably on my top-10 bench; I particularly admire the interplay between the Classical formal rigor and the more Tchaikovskian/Sibelian horn motifs.


----------



## Lisztfreak

Yes, it's great. What I like most is the impetuous energy and passion in it. It's very badly behaved sometimes, this symphony. Especially in the scherzo, where the timpani are first-class, and in the finale with it's fugal sections and a huge climax that's more like disciplined noise than music. And the tension is never loosened. The first movement is as tense as the highest string of the violin.


----------



## jedmat

Well, this thread appears to be on hiatus, so I'll sneak in my 2 cents worth, in no particular order:
Beethoven No. 4
Sibelius No. 7
Mozart No. 29
Haydn No. 97
Dvorak No. 7
Bruckner No. 4
Tchaikovsky No. 3
Schumann No. 4
Bizet Symphony in C
Berlioz Harold in Italy
I think I'd feel less guilt compiling a "100 Favorites" list - I adore Schubert, all the Beethoven except No. 8,
all the Haydn starting with No. 88, Mozart's last half-dozen, on & on.


----------



## World Violist

I've heard some good recordings of Beethoven's Ninth... and I don't see what the big deal is. I can understand its massive historical importance, but it just isn't as great (in my humble opinion, of course) as the Third or some others. Here is my once again revised list:

10. Brahms 4
9. Dvorak 9
8. Brahms 1
7. Sibelius 6
6. Mahler 9
5. Beethoven 3
4. Mahler 6
3. Sibelius 3
2. Mahler 2
1. Sibelius 7

Yes, Sibelius' Seventh has finally topped my list.


----------



## kiwipolish

Choosing only one symphony per composer:

1. Bruckner 3
2. Mendelssohn 3
3. Shostakovich 7
4. Haydn 37 (and all the others!)
5. Beethoven 7
6. Berlioz Fantastique
7. Brahms 3
8. Roussel 3
9. Dvorak 7
10. Mahler 6


----------



## World Violist

kiwipolish said:


> 4. Haydn 37 (and all the others!)


You blew the whole concept with that statement. 

Sorry, I couldn't help it.


----------



## kiwipolish

World Violist said:


> You blew the whole concept with that statement.


Yeah, sorry, but that's the truth! I recently bought the complete Haydn symphonies on BrilliantClassics (under Adam Fischer) and rediscovered every single symphony, listening to all of them, almost one after another, in one breath! The only other composer that I can take in such quantities is Bach... but he did not compose standalone symphonies. Haydn really invented the symphony, and his invention still stands.


----------



## SamGuss

Time for a revised list again.


10. Beethoven Symphony No. 4
9. Dvorak Symphony No. 7
8. Bruckner Symphony No. 4
7. Sibelius Symphony No. 2
6. Mahler Symphony No. 8
5. Saint-Saens Symphony No. 3
4. Mahler No. 5
3. Shostakovich No. 7
2. Mahler No. 2
1. Dvorak No. 9


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*O.K.: here's a version of OUR top symphonies list*

Since this thread influenced me to consider the endeavor, I took the results of _this_ thread to the 'counting-lab' to come up with our own composite version of "Favorite Symphonies." Before I begin, though, a little word concerning my methodology:

1. In the case of a user furnishing multiple lists, only the poster's most recent list was used.
2. Obvious non-symphonies (e.g.: 1812 Overture) were omitted from the calculations.
3. Members who provided unordered lists exceeding 10 symphonies were considered to have cast spoiled ballots. Sorry- for me to have used the data otherwise would have required speculation that I'm not prepared to make.
4. Contributors who did not specifically provide any ordinal rankings for their lists had their mentions weighted equally. Likewise, any members who indicated ties in their choices had equal weight provided to their tie entries.
5. (The linch-pin of the whole effort) For people who DID provide ordinal rankings, a 2% step reduction was applied after entry one, i.e.: number 1 on a list=50 pts, #2=49, #3=48 and so on. As I think about it more, I believe that, if anything, a 2% step reduction is TOO BIG. However, it does beat cheese out of a 10% step reduction with the final step having equal distance between step 9 and zero-zip. 
The ramification of entry 5 is that more value is placed on a piece being on multiple lists than simply being very high on a limited number of lists. A work gets more points by being placed lowest on 5 lists than it does by being placed highest on 4 lists, for instance.

All right, then. Here goes-

1. Beethoven 9
2. Beethoven 5
3. Beethoven 6
4. Dvorák 9
5. Brahms 1
6. Beethoven 3
7. Tchaikovsky 6
8. Mahler 5
9. Beethoven 7
10. Mahler 9

Beethoven in the first three slots, four of the first six, half of the top 10. I found it even more interesting that Brahms 1 pretty much lapped its fellow Brahms symphonies.

11. Sibelius 5
12. Bruckner 8
13. Schubert 9
14. Brahms 4
15. Schubert 8
16. Sibelius 2
17. Mozart 40
18. Berlioz Fantastique
19. Mozart 41
20. Tchaikovsky 5

Mozart finally cracks the list @ 17, behind two Sibelius symphonies. Berlioz _Symphonie Fantastique_ is OUR top Gallic symphony. Schubert 9 rates ahead of Schubert 8.

21. Mahler 4
22. Shostakovich 5
23. Shostakovich 8
24. Tchaikovsky 4
25. Shostakovich 10
26. (t) Bruckner 7
26. (t) Shostakovich 7
28. Beethoven 4
29. Mahler 2
30. Sibelius 7

Shostakovich 8 suprisingly high, to my mind.

31. Brahms 3
32. Bruckner 5
33. Beethoven 2
34. Mahler 6
35. Saint-Säens 3
36. Walton 1
37. Mozart 25
38. (t) Borodin 2
38. (t) Mahler 3
40. Mahler 8

Brahms 3... 3rd among Brahms symphonies (?)- The Walton 1 has its fans. Saint-Säens 3 is the number two French symphony- but a _distant_ #2. Mozart 25 places 3rd among Mozart symphonies... interesting-

41. (t) Prokofiev 1
41. (t) Prokofiev 5
43. Dvorák 8
44. Ives 4
45. Liszt- Faust
46. (t) Schubert 5
46. (t) Schumann 4
46. (t) Dvorák 7
46. (t) Rachmaninoff 2
50. Brahms 2
51. Rachmaninoff 1
52. Nielsen 3

Don't know if Ives 4 would have come in so high if this board had a greater percentage of European participation. An even bigger surprise here is the presence of Rachmaninoff 1.

Here concludes the symphonies that were mentioned on three or more legitimate lists. The 'elephant-in-the-living-room' stunner is, of course, the absence of Haydn. Bottom line is- no three posters mentioned the same Haydn symphony- and that's what's needed to get on the board. One more thing I noticed- the aggregate support for ALL Mendelssohn symphonies would not have been enough to crack the top 25.

I'll look back at those broadcast lists again- I'll be curious about direct comparisons and contrasts...


----------



## emiellucifuge

Top 10: 

Dvorak 7
Mahler 8
Prokofiev 5
Sibelius 2
Dvorak 4
Tchaikovsky 6
Haydn 94
Haydn 104
Beethoven 5
Liszt Faust


----------



## TresPicos

Wow! Great feat!

But I guess we have to stop making fun of them Aussies then, considering the fact that not only does our own list _also _have 5 Beethoven symphonies in the top 10, but we actually have replaced Dvorak's 9th with Beethoven's at the top spot! Geez!


----------



## nickgray

Shostakovich 10
Pettersson 7
Myaskovsky 24
Bruckner 3
Mahler 4
Beethoven 2
Schnittke 8
Tchaikovsky 4
Schumann 4
Langgaard 10

Deliberately done it one composer - one symphony way, otherwise it would get insanely complicated.


----------



## Andy Loochazee

Chi_town/Philly said:


> 5. (The linch-pin of the whole effort) For people who DID provide ordinal rankings, a 2% step reduction was applied after entry one, i.e.: number 1 on a list=50 pts, #2=49, #3=48 and so on. As I think about it more, I believe that, if anything, a 2% step reduction is TOO BIG. However, it does beat cheese out of a 10% step reduction with the final step having equal distance between step 9 and zero-zip.
> The ramification of entry 5 is that more value is placed on a piece being on multiple lists than simply being very high on a limited number of lists. A work gets more points by being placed lowest on 5 lists than it does by being placed highest on 4 lists, for instance.[/SIZE]


As you say, your *Assumption No 5* above is a key feature of your methodology. If I understand you correctly, your calculations assume a 2% step reduction in value per entry, where ordinal ranks are provided. This means that the first placed symphony is valued at 2% more than the second placed symphony, etc, all the way down the list, so that eventually the 10th placed symphony is worth 80% of the first.

This approach implicitly assume that symphonies constitute a discrete preference block for all voters. It is surely far more likely that a typical person would rank his/her classical music preferences with a mixture of genres, so that for example a PC might be first choice, next a symphony, next a cello sonata, next an opera, followed some way down by another symphony etc. On this scenario, comparing the first symphony with the second and later symphonies would actually take you much further down the preference schedule of a typical person than you have assumed, so that a mere 2% reduction in value would appear to be much too small. If so all your results would presumably go clean out of the window.


----------



## starry

When you are listing pieces of a very high quality I don't think preferential order really means much, particularly with those who have heard more and so know more great pieces.


----------



## World Violist

Mahler 3
Sibelius 6
Bruckner 8
Shostakovich 10
Vaughan Williams 5
Mahler 6
Mahler 9
Beethoven 3
Beethoven 7
Sibelius 7


----------



## Bobotox

Raff No. 5
Rubinstein No. 4
Mahler No. 2
Scriabin No. 3
Martucci No. 1
Berwald No. 1
Glazunov No 1
Rubinstein No. 6
Svendsen No. 1
Braga Santos No. 4


----------



## Artemis

Recent discussion in this thread concerning the appropriate weighting of voters' preferences has prompted me to delve a little further into this subject using empirical evidence based on the UK's Classic FM 2009 _Hall of Fame_ survey of listeners' classical music favourites.

Before anyone informs me of something about which I am already painfully aware, I do fully realise that this annual CFM survey possibly has serious limitations in that its typical audience is probably not the most astute or knowledgeable cross section of the classical music listening public. But in present circumstances it's the most convenient survey to use, and involves a very much larger consumer base than the Australian ABC poll.

The CFM survey extends to 300 items but I looked at the Top 100 results only. It covers all classes of classical music, and bases its results on voters' favourite 3 selections. Among the Top 100 results, 13 were symphonies occupying positions: 5, 9, 14, 21, 22, 24, 31, 45, 48, 52, 61, 65, 74.

Now, following CTP's suggestion of weighting results using a 2% decline per item, I assume that he meant a 2% geometric decline such that each entry is 98% of the value of the one above it. On this reckoning, the following results obtain:(i) The 13 symphonies referred to above have an overall tally score of 699, using a value of 100 as the numeraire for the number 1 item in the Top 100. This score of 699 represents 16% of the aggregate value of all 100 places. Thus, on a weighted preference basis, symphonies as a whole represent only a slightly higher "value" than merely looking at their number would suggest (13%). This result may perhaps be a little surprising to some, as according to much discussion on this Forum it might appear that symphonies are by far the most important category. These results suggest that this is not the case.

(ii) Looking at the difference in ranking between the first and tenth placed symphonies (ranks 5 and 52 respectively), and applying CTP's suggested 2% geometric decline per single item, produces an average (geometric) decline of 9.1% between each of those 10 symphonies. This is quite an interesting result, I think, and closer to what was used earlier on in this thread. Hence, using CTP's 2% decline actually implies a much larger figure if account is to be taken of the placing of symphonies, per se, in listeners' overall rankings!
​It's quite interesting what can be done with statistics, isn't it?


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

It's not my intention to have _too long_ a digression concerning my chosen weighting system- 
but there are some interesting points that merit further discussion.

I think we can agree that the weighting system chosen becomes less important when the size of the polling sample goes up. That's not to say it's unimportant. It's just that a large sample helps militate against certain... well- idiosyncratic results. The corollary is that the smaller the sample, the more important the weighting system. (At the time of my count, the sample was slightly less than 4-dozen.) The way the math works out on the "steps" I applied is that no symphony listed by only one person (no matter how highly ranked) can 'out-point' one mentioned by two people. No symphony named by only two people can 'out-point' one entered by three. Neither can one placed by three finish ahead of one nominated by four; nor can one tapped by four score higher than one forwarded by five. As one might guess, I'm very much O.K. with this. [It's _mathematically_ possible that one touted by five can get a larger total than one advanced by six, but it's extraordinarily unlikely.]

It's not just a theoretical consideration- prior to my tallies, three symphonies were listed as someone's Number 1 favorite, and were mentioned by no others. [Bruckner 3, Mahler 10 & Prokofiev 3.] Under the old 10% step-reduction, these works would finish ahead of Bruckner 4 & 9, Mahler 1, Mendelssohn's _Italian_ Symphony, Schumann's _Rhenish_ Symphony, and Beethoven's 8th. Of roughly equal interest, there's the case of Nielsen's 5th Symphony vs. a reliable war-horse like Rachmaninoff 2. Now normally, Rach 2 would probably out-poll Nielsen 5 everywhere except Denmark (sorry, boss). However, the fact that someone had Nielsen 5 as their number 2 favorite means that it would edge Rach 2 if using the earlier 10% reduction formula.

I'm not sure that a 2% reduction is best- but I _am_ sure that it's better than a 10% reduction... 
_especially_ in the context of a statistically small sample.


----------



## kmisho

Tchaikovsky 6
Prokoviev 3, 5
Shostakovich 4,5
Beethoven 7
Rachmaninov 3
Messiaen Turangalila Symphony
Bliss Colour Symphony
Dvorak New World Symphony


----------



## Sid James

In no particular order:

Shostakovich 10
Walton 1
Berlioz 'Symphonie Fantastique'
Hovhaness 22 'City of Light'
Messiaen 'Turangalila Symphony'
Mahler 10
Diamond 8
Beethoven 3 'Eroica'
Bruckner 6
Haydn 101 'The Clock'

Some which only just missed out - Bliss 'A Colour Symphony,' Mahler 1 & 4, Bruckner 0 & 9, Tchaikovsky 6 'Pathetique,' Beethoven 4 & 9 'Choral,' Schubert 8 'Unfinished,' Bax 7, Scriabin 'Poem of Ecstasy,' Tal 1-3, Hovhaness 2 'Mysterious Mountain,' 50 'Mount St Helens,' Liszt 'A Faust Symphony,' Haydn 49 'La Passione,' 99, Vaughan Williams 4, Janacek Sinfonietta


----------



## Lukecash12

Roslavets' Chamber Symphony is pretty great, I might add.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*A NEW update... sure, why not?*

Following the method I began in this post, I thought it would be interesting to update the rankings, but this time enter some ranking units where each unit is equivalent to an average vote (i.e.: one mention on an unordered list, or a median mention on an ordered list). In cases where rounding produces ties that can be broken by taking entries to another decimal point, I'll do so. This will do two things- 1) provide a better feel for the 'distances' (or more often, _lack_ of 'distances') in support, and 2) reinforce how small a sample we acutally have (right now, not much more than 50 valid responses):

1. Beethoven 9- 17.8
2. Beethoven 5- 17.2
have pretty much broken away from the pack. 3 to 4 ticks behind is the 'chase-group'-

3. Beethoven 6- 14.0
4. Dvorák 9- 13.8
5. Tchaikovsky 6- 13.3 
6. Beethoven 3- 13.2
all within one vote of one another. Next up is the pair-

7. Beethoven 7- 12.3
8. Brahms 1- 12.0
[World Violist's updated list dropping Brahms 1 bumped it out of the top half-dozen.]

next, a set of five within one vote of one another-
9. Bruckner 8- 10.9
10. Mahler 5- 10.3
11. Mahler 9- 10.11
12. Sibelius 5- 10.05
13.- Schubert 9- 9.9

then, another quintet separated by a vote-and-a-third-
14. Sibelius 2- 9.02
15. Brahms 4- 8.99
16. Schubert 8- 8.8
17. Shostakovich 10- 8.1
18. Berlioz _Fantastique_- 7.7

Shostakovich 10- helped by recent support. Looking back, 10/11 Mahler 9 & Sibelius 5 + 14/15 Sibelius 2 & Brahms 4 are more like statistical dead-heats. However, for some multi-way near-dead-heats, there are more groupings to consider. like-

19. Mozart 40- 6.98
20. Mahler 4- 6.97
21. Shostakovich 5- 6.93
22. Mozart 41- 6.91
23. Tchaikovsky 5- 6.90
separated by 8 one-hundredths. Occupying a lonely place between two tight packs is

24. Tchaikovsky 4- 6.2
25. Shostakovich 8- 5.9

and then another quintet with only eight one-hundreths betwen them-
26.(t) Bruckner 7- 5.04
26.(t) Shostakovich 7- 5.04
28. Prokofiev 5- 5.00
29. Beethoven 2- 4.98
30. Beethoven 4- 4.96

and now (this'll sound familiar) the duet of-
31. Mahler 2- 4.3
32. Walton 1- 4.2

we've has fivesomes separated by .08, how about a foursome separated by .05?-
33.(t) Brahms 3- 4.05
33.(t) Mahler 3- 4.05
35. Mahler 8- 4.01
36. Bruckner 5- 4.00

and for good measure, another quartet with equally little difference-
37. Sibelius 7- 3.97
38. Liszt _Faust_- 3.95
39.(t) Schumann 4- 3.92
39.(t) Dvorák 7- 3.92

and ending with-
41.(t) Saint-Saëns 3- 3.86
41.(t) Mahler 6- 3.86

which wraps up all symphonies mentioned on four or more legitimate lists.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Nice work very interesting!


----------



## World Violist

Leave it to me to knock a composer out of the top six...


----------



## Dim7

Beethoven 3
Mahler 6
Mahler 2
Shostakovich 7
Bruckner 4
Bruckner 7
Bruckner 9
Schubert 9
Mozart 41
Sibelius 7


----------



## Il Seraglio

A rough list...

1.) Beethoven No. 9 _Choral_
2.) Shostakovich No. 11
3.) Mozart No. 40
4.) Beethoven No. 3 _Eroica_
5.) Clementi No. 4
6.) Mozart No. 39
7.) Haydn No. 104 _London_
8.) Haydn No. 22 _The Philosopher_
9.) Scriabin No. 3
10.) Schubert No. 9 _The Great_


----------



## Tapkaara

Dim7 said:


> Beethoven 3
> Mahler 6
> Mahler 2
> Shostakovich 7
> Bruckner 4
> Bruckner 7
> Bruckner 9
> Schubert 9
> Mozart 41
> Sibelius 7


Sibelius...how surprising!


----------



## Ravellian

1. Tchaikovsky 6
2. Beethoven 3
3. Mahler 9
4. Nielsen 5
5. Tchaikovsky 4
6. Shostakovich 5
7. Mahler 5
8. Beethoven 7
9. Schubert 9
10. Mozart 40


----------



## starry

No particular order

Mozart 41
Brahms 4
Beethoven 6
Elgar 1
Sibelius 5
Haydn 97
Schubert 9
Mendelssohn 4
Tchaikovsky 5
Borodin 2


----------



## Burnibus

Beethoven 3
Beethoven 9
Brahms 3
Beethoven 8
Brahms 4
Dvořák 9
Nielsen 3
Schubert 8
Mahler 6
Mendelssohn 1


----------



## SamGuss

A year and a half since my last revision, it's that time again:

In July 2008 it was:

10. Beethoven Symphony No. 4
9. Dvorak Symphony No. 7
8. Bruckner Symphony No. 4
7. Sibelius Symphony No. 2
6. Mahler Symphony No. 8
5. Saint-Saens Symphony No. 3
4. Mahler No. 5
3. Shostakovich No. 7
2. Mahler No. 2
1. Dvorak No. 9 

In December 2009 it is:

10. Mahler No. 2 (down from #2)
9. Beethoven No. 9
8. Shostakovich No. 5
7. Mahler No. 5 (down from #4)
6. Mahler No. 1
5. Dvorak No. 7 (up from #9)
4. Bruckner No. 4 (up from #8)
3. Sibelius No. 2 (up from #7)
2. Beethoven No. 3
1. Dvorak No. 9 (still my favorite lol)

So still some favorites over time, but with a couple new additions.


----------



## paulchiu

Schubert: Symphony #9
Saint-Saëns: Symphony #3 
Mahler: Symphony #6
Mahler: Symphony #8
Brahms:Symphony #4
Bruckner:Symphony #7
Beethoven: Symphony #6
Rachmaninov: Symphony #1
Rachmaninov: Symphony #2
Tchaikovsky:Symphony #4


----------



## DavidMahler

10. Tchaikovsky 6
9. Bruckner 9
8. Mahler 6
7. Mahler 5
6. Mahler 4
5. Mahler 3
4. Brahms 1
3. Brahms 4
2. Mahler 2
1. Mahler 9


----------



## beetzart

1. Beethoven 9
2. Mozart 41
3. Beethoven 5
4. Brahms 1
5. Tchaikovsky 6
6. Alkan (one for piano, if that counts!)
7. Schumann 4
8. Schubert 8
9. Mozart 40
10. Dvorak 7


----------



## Briano

No preferences, just the list alphabetically:

Beethoven 5
Beethoven 7
Brahms 2
Brahms 3
Dvorak 8
Dvorak 9
Mahler 1
Prokofiev 1 'Classic'
Schubert 9 'The Great'
Sibelius 2


----------



## Il Seraglio

If programmatic symphonies count

1.) Mozart #40
2.) Beethoven #9 _Choral_
3.) Mahler #9
4.) Mozart #25
5.) Mozart #41 _Jupiter_
6.) Beethoven #6 _Pastoral_
7.) Haydn #49 _La Passione_
8.) Berlioz _Romeo et Juliette_
9.) Schubert #9 _The Great_
10.) Bruckner #9


----------



## Guest

Beethoven 9
Bruckner 4
Mahler 2
Beethoven 5
Beethoven 6
Beethoven 3
Mozart 40
Dvorak 9
Tchaikovsky 6
Berlioz Symphonie fantastique

Not in any particular order.


----------



## alexmtin114

Mahler Symphony No. 9 
Haydn Symphony No. 34
Beethoven Symphony No. 5
Mozart Symphony No. 25 
Barber Symphony No. 1 
Haydn Symphony No. 94
Dvorak Symphony No. 9 
Ives Symphony No. 1 
Brahms Symphony No. 2
Beethoven Symphony No. 9


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

0) Bizet; Franck; Bruckner; Vierne
1) Mahler; Tchaikovsky; Bruckner; Skryabin; Balakirev; Glier
2) Bruckner; Borodin; Tchaikovsky; Mahler; Rimsky-Korsakov; Skryabin; Glazunov
3) Beethoven; Mahler; Bruckner; Tchaikovsky; Brahms
4) Mahler; Bruckner; Tchaikovsky; Brahms; Magnard
5) Bruckner; Mahler
6) Beethoven; Tchaikovsky; Bruckner; Mahler
7) Bruckner; Beethoven; Glazunov
8) Schubert; Bruckner
9) Schubert; Bruckner; Beethoven; Mahler; Dvorák


----------



## Lemminkainen

Beethoven 3
Beethoven 7
Sibelius 2
Dvorak 9
Mendelssohn 3
Lutoslawski 3
Messiaen Turangalila
Tchaikovsky 4
Brahms 4
Mozart 35

I know that "La Mer" inhabits some twilight world between symphony and symphonic poem, but if it qualifies it goes on the list.


----------



## Eusebius12

Ok.

1. Beethoven 9th
2. Beethoven 3rd
3. Schumann 3rd
4. Schumann 1st
5. Beethoven 7
6. Tchaikovsky 6
7. Mozart 41
8. Elgar 2
9. Brahms 4
10. Schubert 8
11. Mozart 40
12. Elgar 1
13. Beethoven 6
14. Beethoven 5
15. Tchaikovsky 5
16. Tchaikovsky 4
17. Dvorak 7
18. Schumann 2nd
19. Schubert 9
20. Berlioz Harold in Italy


----------



## Guest

DrMike said:


> Beethoven 9
> Bruckner 4
> Mahler 2
> Beethoven 5
> Beethoven 6
> Beethoven 3
> Mozart 40
> Dvorak 9
> Tchaikovsky 6
> Berlioz Symphonie fantastique
> 
> Not in any particular order.


I forgot some:
Schubert 8
Schubert 9


----------



## TWhite

In no particular order: 
Brahms #2
Brahms #4
Rachmaninov #1
Mahler #5
Beethoven #7
Beethoven #8
Copland #3
Dvorak #6
Vaughn-Williams #4
Walton #1

Tom


----------



## joen_cph

A suggested 10 symphonies off-the-beaten-track:

01 Henze: I /Henze
02 Slonimsky: II
03 Erdmann: III 
04 Sumera: IV
05 Rochberg: V 
06 Tubin: V / Järvi
07 Nørgård: VII 
08 Pettersson VIII
09 Lajtha: IX
10 Holmboe: XI


----------



## Nix

1. Beethoven 6
2. Beethoven 5
3. Sibelius 3
4. Mozart 41
5. Mahler 5
6. Dvorak 9
7. Beethoven 7
8. Shosti 1
9. Sibelius 5
10. Brahms 4


But I haven't heard much.


----------



## Eusebius12

Eusebius12 said:


> Ok.
> 
> 1. Beethoven 9th
> 2. Beethoven 3rd
> 3. Schumann 3rd
> 4. Schumann 1st
> 5. Beethoven 7
> 6. Tchaikovsky 6
> 7. Mozart 41
> 8. Elgar 2
> 9. Brahms 4
> 10. Schubert 8
> 11. Mozart 40
> 12. Elgar 1
> 13. Beethoven 6
> 14. Beethoven 5
> 15. Tchaikovsky 5
> 16. Tchaikovsky 4
> 17. Dvorak 7
> 18. Schumann 2nd
> 19. Schubert 9
> 20. Berlioz Harold in Italy


sorry couldn't stop there
21. d'Indy Symphony sur un chant montagnard francais
22. Scriabin Poem of Extasy
23. Schumann 4th
24. Brahms 3rd
25. Mozart 35
26. Mozart 39
27. Dvorak 8
28. Gorecki 3
29 Prokofiev 1st
30. Cesar Franck D minor
31. Mozart 38
32. Prokofiev 5
33. Beethoven 8
34. Sibelius 5
35. Mozart 36
36. Walton
37. Brahms 1st
38. Mozart 25
39. Sibelius 2nd
40. Chausson B Minor


----------



## robert

joen_cph said:


> A suggested 10 symphonies off-the-beaten-track:
> 
> 01 Henze: I /Henze
> 02 Slonimsky: II
> 03 Erdmann: III
> 04 Sumera: IV
> 05 Rochberg: V
> 06 Tubin: V / Järvi
> 07 Nørgård: VII
> 08 Pettersson VIII
> 09 Lajtha: IX
> 10 Holmboe: XI


Great List.......

Robert


----------



## Ian Elliott

*Favorite ten symphonies*

Beethoven #3
Beethoven #7
Schubert #9
Schumann #4
Brahms #3
Sibelius #1
Sibelius #6
Enescu #1
Roussel #3
Martinu #2


----------



## claroche

In no particular order:

Beethoven 9
Beethoven 3
Beethoven 5
Beethoven 6
Beethoven 7
Mahler 5
Symphonie Fantastique
Mozart Jupiter
Dvorak 9
Tchai 6


----------



## Art Rock

I can't remember whether I already replied, but right now:

1. Schubert 8
2. Bruckner 9
3. Mahler 4
4. Gorecki 3
5. Mahler 9
6. Berlioz Fantastique
7. Beethoven 6
8. Mendelssohn 3
9. Saint Saens 3
10. Brahms 1,2,3,4 (ex aequo)


----------



## Ravellian

My only problem with these symphony lists is that I tend to listen to an awful lot of Haydn and Mozart, but without paying much attention to which one because they are relatively similar (though I enjoy all of them). So, to be more fair, I will list groups of symphonies rather than individual ones this time...

1. Tchaikovsky 4-6
2. Haydn (all)
3. Beethoven 3, 5-9
4. Mahler 2-5, 9
5. Mozart 25, 29, 31-41
6. Sibelius 2, 5
7. Schubert 8-9
8. Shostakovich 5, 7, 10
9. Brahms 3-4
10. and now for some great individual symphonies: Nielsen 5, Rachmaninov 2, Scriabin 4, Dvorak 9, Prokofiev 1, Schumann 4


----------



## trazom

this is one of the genres where my tastes are more specialized than expansive....

1. Mozart #41 Jupiter
2. Mozart #40
3. Mozart #39
4. Mozart #38 Prague
5. Mozart #36 Linz
6. Mozart #35 Haffner
7. Schubert #4
8. Schubert #8
9. Schubert #9
10. Beethoven #7/#3


----------



## toucan

Haydn #88
Mozart #25
Mozart #29
Mozart #40
Beethoven #3
Schumann #2
Bruckner #4
Mahler #2
Mahler #7
Lutoslawski #2


----------



## Guest

It's too hard to pick just 10:

Brahms (all)
Dvorak (all)
Mendelssohn (1,3-5)
Sibelius (all)
Prokofiev (1, 3-7)
Vaughan Williams (2-9)
Barber (both)
Harris (3, 5-7, 9)
Rachmaninoff (all)
Martinu (all)
Roussel (all)
Shostakovich (5)
Rautavaara (3, 7, 8)
Bax (all)
Ives (all)
Grant Still (2)
William Schuman (3, 5)
Hovhaness (Mysterious Mountain)
Beach (Gaelic)
Honegger (3)
Dyson (G major symphony)


----------



## Ian Elliott

Ok, here goes again. I will list my personal favorites, not necessarily the symphonies I consider greatest. Who cares about greatest? You want to live in a palace or a comfortable house?
Beethoven: 1, 3, 6, 7
Schubert: 9
Schumann: 4
Brahms: 3
Dvorak: 7
Balakirev: 1
Enescu: 1
Szymanowski: 4
Scriabin: 3, 4, 5
Roussel: 1, 2, 3, 4
Honegger: 4
Martinu: 1, 2, 3, 4
Vaughan Williams: 3, 5, 6


----------



## Webernite

I suppose my absolute favorite symphonies are Brahms' 3rd and 4th, and Beethoven's 8th. But I also love Webern's Symphony and Schoenberg's Chamber Symphony No. 1 in E Major, if those two count.


----------



## Conor71

Beethoven: 7
Sibelius: 5 & 6
Mahler: 2 & 5
Shostakovich: 5 & 10
Dvorak: 3
Mozart: 40
Vaughan Williams: 1


----------



## DavidMahler

Updated list on my part:

in order:

The greatest symphonies:


50. Borodin - 2

49. Schumann - 3 "Rhenish"

48. Berlioz - Harold en Italie

47. Tchaikovsky - 2 "Little Russian"

46. Mahler - 8 "Symphony Of A Thousand"

45. Dvorak - 7

44. Beethoven - 4

43. Rachmaninov - 2

42. Schumann - 2

41. Schubert - 8 "Unfinished"

40. Sibelius - 7

39. Haydn - 102

38. Mozart - 41 "Jupiter

37. Sibelius - 6

36. Alfven - 4 "From the Outermost Skerries"

35. Dvorak - 8

34. Mahler - 1 "Titan"

33. Saint-Saens - 3 "Organ"

32. Mozart - 40

31. Shostakovich - 5

30. Bruckner - 8

29. Beethoven - 6 "Pastoral"

28. Schubert - 9 "Great"

27. Belioz - Symphonie Fantastique

26. Prokofiev - 5

25. Dvorak - 9 "New World"

24. Beethoven - 9 "Choral"

23. Franck - Symphony in D Minor

22. Bruckner - 7

21. Sibelius - 2

20. Tchaikovsky - 4

19. Beethoven - 7

18. Mahler - 6

17. Beethoven - 5

16. Tchaikovsky - 5

15. Brahms - 3

14. Brahms - 2

13. Beethoven - 3 "Eroica"

12. Tchaikovsky - 6 "Pathetique"

11. Mahler - 4

10. Mahler - 5

9. Mahler - Das Lied von der Erde

8. Mahler - 7 "Song of the Night"

7. Bruckner - 9

6. Sibelius - 5

5. Brahms - 1

4. Brahms - 4

3. Mahler - 3

2. Mahler - 2 "Resurrection"

1. Mahler - 9


----------



## Roi N

1. Mozart 41
2. Haydn 101
3. Beethoven 5
4. Haydn 98
5. Mozart 40
6. Haydn 82
7. Mozart 35
8. Haydn 93
9. Haydn 100
10. Mozart 29 

The classical period is just so much better than the rest...


----------



## hpowders

In no particular order:

Haydn 82
Haydn 83
Haydn 88
Haydn 94
Haydn 96
Haydn 97
Haydn 98
Haydn 99
Haydn 102
Haydn 103

FJ Haydn is just so much better than the rest.


----------

