# What period/era you think is ultimately the best?



## PeterPechinin (Jun 12, 2019)

Medieval

Renaissance

Baroque

Classical

Romantic

20th century

21st century


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Had to give it to the 20th. But that speaks as much to my personal preference and values as to anything else.


----------



## DBLee (Jan 8, 2018)

If you classify Beethoven and Schubert as "Classical" then Classical, if "Romantic" then Romantic.


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

If by "best" you mean "favorite" then it's the Classical Period for me. My holy trinity is Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

The best is yet to come


----------



## rice (Mar 23, 2017)

My favourite is romantic/late-romantic period, many late-romantic works were composed in the early 20th century, so I can't pick one.
Unless 20th century means modernist or contemporary, then it's romantic for me


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Taking "Best" as "Favourite", romantic.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

As has been said by some extremely knowledgeable posters ''Romantic" is the favorite in my book but I have a strong liking for Handle.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Pre-1900 is probably going to win here, it's usually the case.

Voted 20th century, since it fusions previous tendencies and adds to them in a wonderful, varied way, and has much more repertoire than the 21st so far, including the old-time classics of Mahler, Debussy, Ravel, Janacek, Nielsen, Sibelius, Scriabin, Elgar, Stravinsky, Neue Wiener Schule, etc.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Voted Romantic.

Incredible to think that having Wagner, Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Bruckner, Dvorak, Liszt, Grieg, Saint-Saens, Rimsky, Mussorgsky, Alkan, and Strauss II at the same time was a reality in 1880.

Music has evolved since, and some composers took advantage of new discoveries, but as a whole, it lost 'Schwung', from which loss it is yet to recover.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

My favourite period is the first half of the 20th century. The years from c. 1910 through to the 1930s especially brought about numerous innovations and changes in approach but it could still accommodate the late-romantic 'old guard'. Any timeframe which has Weill, Schoenberg and Varèse rubbing shoulders with R. Strauss, Vaughan Williams and Rachmaninov has quite a lot going for it in my book.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2019)

None holds sway as "the best". Gorgeous music was composed by a range of composers from across all periods.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Very surprised to see 20th leading (@ 27 votes old) even though I voted for it. Surely the Romantic will come out on top when more have voted?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

MacLeod said:


> None holds sway as "the best". Gorgeous music was composed by a range of composers from across all periods.


I'd assume the poll is about which sole period to ultimately choose as a personal or ~objective favourite.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

I'm really surprised to see a lot of votes for the 20th century.
It's my favorite period too for the same reasons of joen_cph. There is beautiful traditional music and a lot of great stuff completely different from the past. And there are also other genres of music that I love (jazz, great american songbook, brazilian music, folk, rock) so it's an easy choice for me.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

I'm pleasantly surprised too Norman...will it last ?


----------



## Tchaikov6 (Mar 30, 2016)

20th should be even one more ahead but I was on my phone and accidentally chose 21st instead.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Voted for 20th century, which has a relatively high proportion of my favourite music.

But other than personal preferences, there isn't a "best".


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Nereffid said:


> Voted for 20th century, which has a relatively high proportion of my favourite music.


Actually, I should add in the interests of balance that the 20th century has a relatively high proportion of my least favourite music, too!


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Nereffid said:


> Actually, I should add in the interests of balance that the 20th century has a relatively high proportion of my least favourite music, too!


Me 2.....................


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

DBLee said:


> If you classify Beethoven and Schubert as "Classical" then Classical, if "Romantic" then Romantic.


Are those two enough to sway it? :O


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

I voted for 20th century, but second would be Baroque. Everything else is good too, but I don't know much 21st century stuff to really have an opinion on that and I have to be in a specific mood to listen to anything pre-Baroque.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

My favorite by far is the 20th and 21st century.

I find it hard in my mind to split the 20th and 21st centuries into separate periods, though for several reasons.

First, and most obvious, we are only 20 years into the 21st century.
Second, there really hasn't been a new musical movement that began in the 21st, that wasn't already extant in the 20th.
Third, many composers that were alive and composing in the late 20th century, are still active in the 21st.

Previous periods (to the 20th and 21st centuries) were not noted for the centuries they occured in, but their style, and what differentiated them, musically speaking, from what came before and after them.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2019)

joen_cph said:


> I'd assume the poll is about which sole period to ultimately choose as a personal or ~objective favourite.


Well, yes, I wasn't sure which the OP intended - my personal favourite, or the 'objective' best. Either way, I'd struggle to choose, since I don't specialise in my tastes. I don;t like of one composer, or all of one period, but a reasonbly substantial number of pieces by Vivaldi, Bach, Haydn, Beethoven, Mahler, Debussy, Sibelius, Shostakovich.

I'm short on 21stC, and light on Medieval and Baroque, but classical, romantic, 20thC are well represented!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

The past 400 years. Why be choosy?


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

mikeh375 said:


> I'm pleasantly surprised too Norman...will it last ?


I don't know, I'm surprised because usually the list of favorite composers here suggested (at least to me) a preference for previous centuries. But maybe the sheer quantity and variety of music in the 20th century are things that have a role in this (momentary?) result.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

buhisp
___________________


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

starthrower said:


> The past 400 years. Why be choosy?


I'd have said the past 500!!:lol:


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

I find it interesting that based on current votes the center of weight lies somewhere around 1900.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

The top ten's of the 'Compilation of the TC Top Recommended Lists' is dominated on the whole by the 18th and 19th centuries...so perhaps lots more voting to come there.


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2019)

janxharris said:


> buhisp
> ___________________


"buhisp" ?


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

MacLeod said:


> "buhisp" ?


sorry - bring up his post


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I voted 20thc as favorite, not as best.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

EdwardBast said:


> I voted 20thc as favorite, not as best.


You renegade you (considering the title of the poll)


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Any one know what determines whether polls such as this are moved to the appropriate forum - or not as in this case? Just curious.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

My favourite is the baroque - I just love the patterns - but I wouldn't want to be without any of the periods. Who'd want to be stuck with one style? All life and art has to grow and develop, and ultimately pass to give room to the new and fresh.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

janxharris said:


> Any one know what determines whether polls such as this are moved to the appropriate forum - or not as in this case? Just curious.


AFAIK the mods do not actively 'patrol' all TC threads. If no-one alerts them that this is in the wrong forum (or if no-one cares of course) chances are they will not see it.


----------



## perempe (Feb 27, 2014)

TC need more voters ASAP.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Apparently the majority of Top 5 composers are Classical, the majority of Top 50 composers are Romantic, and the majority of Top 500 composers are 20th Century. So "best", I imagine belongs to the 20th Century category.


----------



## Radames (Feb 27, 2013)

Give me overblown gushing romanticism any day.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

EdwardBast said:


> I voted 20thc as favorite, not as best.


I'm always rather perplexed by these type of statements - how do you define 'best' when it falls below what you consider works for you?


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

janxharris said:


> I'm always rather perplexed by these type of statements - how do you define 'best' when it falls below what you consider works for you?


Huh? I think the notion of a best era in music is silly and that the OP question is the kind of thing you ask people when you want to know their favorite era but realize most of them are unable or unwilling to distinguish their personal preferences from some notion of objective superiority. I am able to make this distinction and so voted for my favorite.


----------



## Guest (Dec 5, 2019)

PeterPechinin said:


> Medieval
> Renaissance
> Baroque
> Classical
> ...


Pre-medieaval - post 21st century.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

I would have to vote for the music of the 20th century as my favorite, not because it is or is not the "best", but because, having lived through a large portion of that century, I find that its art most directly reflects the culture and society I have experienced, with all of its ups and downs, and so speaks most directly to me. And I'd say the same for visual art, literature, theater and other performance art.
Edit: For me, the 21st century is still too new to be considered.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

EdwardBast said:


> Huh? I think the notion of a best era in music is silly and that the OP question is the kind of thing you ask people when you want to know their favorite era but realize most of them are unable or unwilling to distinguish their personal preferences from some notion of objective superiority. *I am able to make this distinction and so voted for my favorite.*


I am interested in how you do this - if you want to share it.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

janxharris said:


> I am interested in how you do this - if you want to share it.


Best era is a matter of personal taste. I don't assume my personal tastes are an objective standard of value. I'm surprised this requires an explanation.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

EdwardBast said:


> Best era is a matter of personal taste. I don't assume my personal tastes are an objective standard of value. I'm surprised this requires an explanation.


Ah - I think your previous post may have allowed for some misinterpretation; I think you are acknowledging that your choice isn't in any way objective and that you wouldn't ever presume to know what that objective 'best' might be. I had thought you were presuming to know.

Please do correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I suppose that without the first (Medieval) none of the others would have been possible. But, at the same time, I find it very difficult to compare them eras as each one offers me different experiences that suit me at different times and in different moods. I would hate to lose any of them and really can't choose a favourite.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

EdwardBast said:


> Best era is a matter of personal taste. I don't assume my personal tastes are an objective standard of value. I'm surprised this requires an explanation.


Ok - apologies - I misunderstood your post.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I'm taking back a comment I used to make on the more 'difficult' contemporary classical, about changing a note won't change the outcome, implying it isn't as hard to write atonal music as tonal. While there is some freedom in choosing between different options, approaches in atonal music, there is the same in tonal as well. I realized that what is there, or built, in the music is what matters.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Phil loves classical said:


> I'm taking back a comment I used to make on the more 'difficult' contemporary classical, about changing a note won't change the outcome, implying it isn't as hard to write atonal music as tonal. While there is some freedom in choosing between different options, approaches in atonal music, there is the same in tonal as well. I realized that what is there, or built, in the music is what matters.


Messiaen's opinion regarding this is interesting:
_"Colour lies at the heart of Messiaen's music. He believed that terms such as "tonal", "modal" and "serial" are misleading analytical conveniences. For him there were no modal, tonal or serial compositions, only music with or without colour. He said that Claudio Monteverdi, Mozart, Chopin, Richard Wagner, Mussorgsky and Stravinsky all wrote strongly coloured music."_


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

hammeredklavier said:


> Messiaen's opinion regarding this is interesting:
> _"Colour lies at the heart of Messiaen's music. He believed that terms such as "tonal", "modal" and "serial" are misleading analytical conveniences. For him there were no modal, tonal or serial compositions, only music with or without colour. He said that Claudio Monteverdi, Mozart, Chopin, Richard Wagner, Mussorgsky and Stravinsky all wrote strongly coloured music."_


I can see that. Debussy also said a similar thing, that music was just colour and rhythms, the rest is all bogus, or something like that.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I think 'color' in music is directly related to harmony, (and to a lesser extent timbre). One of the objectives of serialism is to extinguish harmony, so music composed with this approach in my view is less colorful (and less expressive).


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

hammeredklavier said:


> Messiaen's opinion regarding this is interesting:
> _"Colour lies at the heart of Messiaen's music. He believed that terms such as "tonal", "modal" and "serial" are misleading analytical conveniences. For him there were no modal, tonal or serial compositions, only music with or without colour. He said that Claudio Monteverdi, Mozart, Chopin, Richard Wagner, Mussorgsky and Stravinsky all wrote strongly coloured music."_


Interesting though that none of the composers Messiaen listed as 'colorful' were atonal/serial composers. (Except late Stravinsky and I doubt those particular compositions were the ones Messiaen perceived as 'colorful'.)


----------



## jurianbai (Nov 23, 2008)

Middle Classical... somewhere from Haydn's Op.20 (1772) to Beethoven late quartet Op.135 (1826)


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Phil loves classical said:


> I can see that. Debussy also said a similar thing, that music was just colour and rhythms, the rest is all bogus, or something like that.


Fair, though if there was one more element, it would be the temporal. The relations within development, the big picture and structure. Another way to phrase this is, how can you have music without the mind to interpret it / piece it together.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Remains a surprise to see 20th century holding up with the Romantic.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

janxharris said:


> Remains a surprise to see 20th century holding up with the Romantic.


Sibelius, Scriabin, Rachmaninoff, Mahler, Strauss, Vaughan-Williams, Stravinsky, Nielsen, Prokofiev, Ravel, Bartok, Shostakovich, Myaskovsky, Britten, Puccini, Barber, Weinberg - to name just a few on the conservative side. Why should anyone be surprised?


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

EdwardBast said:


> Sibelius, Scriabin, Rachmaninoff, Mahler, Strauss, Vaughan-Williams, Stravinsky, Nielsen, Prokofiev, Ravel, Bartok, Shostakovich, Myaskovsky, Britten, Puccini, Barber, Weinberg - to name just a few on the conservative side. Why should anyone be surprised?


I assumed The Romantics would dominate - I voted for the 20th Century.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Add 1 to the 20th Century tally: #17


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

tdc said:


> Interesting though that none of the composers Messiaen listed as 'colorful' were atonal/serial composers. (Except late Stravinsky and I doubt those particular compositions were the ones Messiaen perceived as 'colorful'.)


Maybe in Messiaen's case it was his synaesthesia which made the sensation of colour personal to him when hearing the music of certain others and when composing his own.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^^ The Messiaen quote about colour in music (in hammeredklavier's post - #51) certainly sounds synaesthesic. But I don't think the feeling ascribed to him that _terms such as "tonal", "modal" and "serial" are misleading analytical conveniences_ was anything other than a musical perception. So it was a little naughty of tdc to suggest that his preference for colourful music meant he only liked tonal music! And I am sure he would not have removed the late works from his appreciation of Stravinsky - after all, they are pure Stravinsky first and foremost.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I was just pointing out that I think harmony is related to people's perceptions of 'color' in music, and that an objective of Schoenberg in creating his 12 tone system was to extinguish harmony. I then noticed none of the examples Messiaen listed of "colorful" composers were serialists (other than a small percentage of Stravinsky's works). I think it is fair to say that the works Stravinsky is generally most lauded for are not his serial pieces.

Serialism can be applied loosely to composition and the results can vary quite a bit. Even composers I consider mainly tonal like Messiaen, and Schnittke have dabbled in serialism. Schnittke's serial piece _pianissimo_, is a piece of music I like. I think the approach of serialism does in fact generally lead to darker, less colorful sounding music, but the results can still have their own merits. Just as one may choose to use darker tones to paint with on a canvas.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

elgars ghost said:


> Maybe in Messiaen's case it was his synaesthesia which made the sensation of colour personal to him when hearing the music of certain others and when composing his own.


If Messiaen's musings and observances were only due to his personal subjective responses to music as a result of his synaesthesia, it would make his categorizations far more useless than the 'misleading analytical conveniences' he was criticizing. However, I think that there is something a little more universal in the musical colors he was describing, (I won't say completely objective), but I essentially agree with the composers he listed as being 'colorful'. Ravel and Prokofiev are two further examples of composers I find 'colorful'.

That said although categorizations such as modal, serial etc. can be misleading and should be balanced with a deeper knowledge of a given work/composer I think such words are still useful as general descriptors.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

Art Rock said:


> AFAIK the mods do not actively 'patrol' all TC threads. If no-one alerts them that this is in the wrong forum (or if no-one cares of course) chances are they will not see it.





janxharris said:


> Any one know what determines whether polls such as this are moved to the appropriate forum - or not as in this case? Just curious.


I'm happy to leave the thread here as what started as a poll has become an interesting discussion.

20th Century for me, FWIW, although I enjoy music from all these periods. Of course I'm much less familiar with music of the renaissance and am only recently getting to know much of the baroque beyond the well-known 'standards'.

I've also recently started to listen to more music of the present century. Some of the music I've heard live at contemporary music festivals and concerts has been extraordinarily colourful, inventive and enjoyable (though some hasn't!) but I do wonder if much of it will 'last' as beyond a few works it'll never get very much exposure .


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

TurnaboutVox said:


> I'm happy to leave the thread here as what started as a poll has become an interesting discussion.
> 
> 20th Century for me, FWIW, although I enjoy music from all these periods. Of course I'm much less familiar with music of the renaissance and am only recently getting to know much of the baroque beyond the well-known 'standards'.
> 
> I've also recently started to listen to more music of the present century. Some of the music I've heard live at contemporary music festivals and concerts has been extraordinarily colourful, inventive and enjoyable (though some hasn't!) but I do wonder if much of it will 'last' as beyond a few works it'll never get very much exposure .


Is it possible to fix this #17?


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

janxharris said:


> Is it possible to fix this #17?


I'm not quite sure what you're referring to - the vote(s) cast erroneously for the wrong period?

No, I don't think so. We had this query on a poll a number of years ago and I think it wasn't possible to change the votes.

Perhaps we could think of it as a stochastic (and thus firmly mid-20th century) element in the poll?


----------



## DBLee (Jan 8, 2018)

TurnaboutVox said:


> No, I don't think so. We had this query on a poll a number of years ago and I think it wasn't possible to change the votes.


Someone was recently able to change a misplaced vote I cast in another poll: https://www.talkclassical.com/63758-j-s-bach-beethoven-5.html#post1738986


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

1.Romantic if you include middle and late Beethoven
2. Classical (including Beethoven)
Baroque
3. Classical (w/o Beethoven)
4. 20th century
5. Baroque without J.S. Bach
6. Rennisance
7. Medieval
21st century


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

janxharris said:


> I assumed The Romantics would dominate - I voted for the 20th Century.


I have a love/indifferent relationship to the Romantic era. Most of the showy concertos do little for me. As do many of the heavily Beethoven influenced symphonies of the earlier years. I don't get that interested until the late era. But ultimately there is no best era in general. My own personal preferred eras overlap from Mahler/Debussy/Wagner all the way up to the 1990s with the late works of Ligeti and Lutoslawski.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Baroque. No question. Composers were much more actual *musicians* then.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

I say Classical because I love symphonies. Haydn laid the foundation, Mozart made it beautiful, and Beethoven took the symphony to it's limits. The symphonies of Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Mendelssohn, Schubert, Schumann, Bruckner, Mahler, Sibelius, Nielsen, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, and Ives are more-or-less based on those classical models.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

If I can have a whole century, as in "20th century", I'll take 1845-1944, and drag up treasures all the way from the Schumann piano concerto to Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra.


----------



## Andante Largo (Apr 23, 2020)

In my opinion instead of 20th and 21st century should be placed Modernist and Postmodernist eras.


----------

