# Who Are Your Five Favorite Composers And Why?



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Who are your five favorite composers and why? Please try and limit the number of composers to 5.

Since I started this thread, I'll go first.

In no particular order:

1. Ravel - I consider him the very reason I started listening to classical music. The orchestrations, the perfection, the technical mastery, the harmonies, rhythms...he's simply one of my all-time favorites.

2. Berlioz - Another master orchestrator. Hearing his "Symphonie Fantastique," "Harold In Italy," "Le Damnation de Faust," "L'enfance du Christ," "Requiem," "Romeo et Juliette," etc. have been some of the most rewarding listening experiences I've had.

3. Bruckner - I just love everything about this man's music. Those very vast soundscapes that take shape, from out of nowhere, and just pummel you with their emotional outpouring. Mystical, religious, eye-opening, and thought-provoking are all things that I attach to Bruckner's music and these are the qualities that keep me coming back.

4. Mahler - I consider Mahler to be one of the most bipolar composers in history. I love the way he can reel you in with such a beautiful melody and then just beat you over the head and rip you from limb to limb. I am still discovering his music even though I've heard all of his symphonies.

5. Vaughan Williams - Recently, I didn't know just how important his music was to me until I found myself defending him so aggressively. That lyricism found in his music and those beautiful harmonies are what I love about him.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

I really only have two that I can legitimately call my favorites: Akira Ifukube and Jean Sibelius. Everyone else are merely composers that I really like, and my favorites among them fluctuate with my moods or tatses at any time.

So, if I count Ifukube and Sibelius as my one and two, right now, if I HAD to pick three more (in no particular order):

Khachaturian
Holst
Fumio Hayasaka

Genrally, though, I don't participate in these list exercises, because for people like me, I don't see the point of naming only 5, or 10 or 15 of my favorite composers. In other words, I really I don't see the need to do so if enjoy so many. And I like so many equally that a list of only 5 (or 10 for that matter) isn't enough to contain who I like.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> I really only have two that I can legitimately call my favorites: Akira Ifukube and Jean Sibelius. Everyone else are merely composers that I really like, and my favorites among them fluctuate with my moods or tatses at any time.
> 
> So, if I count Ifukube and Sibelius as my one and two, right now, if I HAD to pick three more (in no particular order):
> 
> ...


It isn't anymore useful to have a thread like this then it is to have a "Mahler vs. Sibelius" thread or a "Requiem vs. Requiem" thread, but I participated in those threads, because I love talking about classical music regardless.

This is as legitimate a thread as either of those you created.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

I'm not disputing the legitimacy of this thread. I am merely saying *for me*, to limit my favorite composers to a list for the sake of putting them on a list is not useful. As I said, I only have two that I can REALLY call my favorite. But I have deep admiration for so many other ones that if I put one on a list, I'm leaving another off.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> I'm not disputing the legitimacy of this thread. I am merely saying *for me*, to limit my favorite composers to a list for the sake of putting them on a list is not useful. As I said, I only have two that I can REALLY call my favorite. But I have deep admiration for so many other ones that if I put one on a list, I'm leaving another off.


Picking 5 absolute favorite composers is easy for me, but this is a daunting task no question about it as I have left off so many, but no worries, the list I have are composers that continue to inspire me through my day-to-day life. They give me the most enjoyment, so anytime I can take the time to acknowledge them, I'm happy to do.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

These list threads are legitimate because they are fun. We all know they are ultimately futile, but it's still fun to try.

1. Beethoven. No doubt about it, he takes the number one position for me. One of the first artist's as hero types, pioneering yet almost universally understood. His music makes me realize how far above the mundane humanity is capable of rising if we would only apply ourselves -- and all this in spite of what should have been the most crippling handicap for a musician.

2. J. S. Bach. Used to be my all time favorite, but just a fraction of a micron less passionate than Beethoven's music. It soars to the same celestial heights a bit less violently.

3. Vaughan-Williams. The Tallis Fantasia alone would put him in my top 5. It is probably my favorite piece of all time and has a lot of emotional significance to me personally. The symphonies too are fantastic.

From here it gets hazy. I'm not really sure about the last two.

4. Handel. His organ concertos make me happy - and trust me that is VERY hard to do these days. His operas, oratorios and anthemic pieces are sublime. His style is firmly rooted in German baroque, but I could tell him apart from Bach on first hearing within a few notes I'd wager. His musical gestures are unique.

5. Shostakovich. The Cello Concerto No. 1 rocks my world. There's just an awful lot going on there in a very short amount of time. I just love the dense textures. His string quartets (many of them partially spelling his name) do for 20th century music what Bach did for baroque. It becomes an intellectual exercise, yet is highly emotional as well.

The last two choices could change tomorrow, but not the first three. I'm probably firmly set in my ways on those.


----------



## LvB (Nov 21, 2008)

The 'who' is easy, though the names change on occasion. The 'why' is trickier. Broadly speaking, my favorite composers, whatever their number, are the ones who I feel are holding nothing back. They give you everything they've got, and even if sometimes they haven't got much the intensity with which they share their ideas and emotions makes up for occasional shortcomings elsewhere.

So, on to the list. I start by consciously omitting Beethoven; to paraphrase Leopold Godowsky, a person does not acknowledge their debt to the air they breathe....

Chronologically--

1) Anton Bruckner
2) Anton Rubinstein
3) Gustav Mahler
4) Richard Strauss
5) Dmitri Shostakovich

I should also note that 'favorite' does not equate to 'those I think are the greatest.' These are the five composers who say something quite personal to me, and I would not always argue that any given work of theirs was at the top of its category.


----------



## JSK (Dec 31, 2008)

1. Rimsky-Korsakov: He was a brilliant orchestrator and his treatment of melody and harmony wasn't bad either. He had a restrained use of orientalism compared to Borodin. His music speaks very directly to me. I've really liked pretty much everything I've heard by the composer.
2. Beethoven: He has always been my default favorite composer. He was the first composer I was really "hooked" to. I like how he broke away from Classicism without truly abandoning it. He wrote so many great and innovative works. I am especially fond of his middle period. I enjoy playing his works more than any other major composer, I think. This is especially true on piano.
3. Khachaturian: I consider him to be a very underrated composer. Sure, he wrote some junk but his best works are breathtaking. I love his orchestration, his treatment of dissonance, and his use of Armenian folk music. He combines elements of melody and rhythm in a very exciting way.
4. Rachmaninoff: He is my favorite composer for the piano, especially for his concertos. Not bad in other genres either.
5. I'm not sure. Possibilities include Tchaikovsky and Borodin.

As you can see, I am quite a musical Russophile.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

I realize I listed my composers, but did not say why.

Ifukube: A fascinating Japanese "nationalist composer." Was to Japan what the "Mighty Handful" was to Russia. Although he composed in the 20th century, he was much like a Japanese Khachaturian; his sound was a throwback to the heyday of Russian nationalism. He sounds like a nationalist Russian composer writing "oriental" music...but the composer is actually "oriental" writing in a style very similar to Russian "orientalism," if that makes sense. Anyway, he was regarded by some as old-fashioned and reactionary, out of touch with modern musical trends. Ifukube largely agreed with his critics, and relished it.

His barbaric, flashy but simple style speaks to me in a way that is so profound. I feel that I must have been Japanese in a past life; it's virtually impossible to explain (or understand) why this music touches me so deeply.

Sibelius: A great mystic composer whose sound is both ancient and modern at the same time. Highly idosyncratic and often strange sounding, again, this is music that cuts to the root of my soul with precision and ease. His tone poems are shrouded in mythic fog and eerily dim light and shadow. They are gateways to ancient worlds of forest gods and Nordic heroes. His symphonies occupy a different realm: for me, they are "music of the spheres": they are like seven very individual planets of various sizes and textures, each unique and beautifiul in their own way. These are distant and cryptic works for many, and I know they are not always willing to give up their rewards easily. But for me, they are perfect works of musical art which never fail to excite me with their mystery and concentrated grandeur.

Sibelius was also regarded as reactionary, a throwback to earlier times and out of touch with modern musical trends. Interesting that my two personal musical gods share this in common. I suppose it says a lot about my and my general tatses in music. We all march to the beat of different drummers, do we not?


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> I suppose it says a lot about my and my general tatses in music. We all march to the beat of different drummers, do we not?


Absolutely, if we all liked the same things, then this universe would be a pretty boring place no question about it.

Hopefully, the composers I listed says something about my musical tastes. I will say that I seem to be one of the only people on this forum who is onboard with impressionism. There aren't that many people that seem to really understand this music quite like I do.

But my tastes can change on a dime. I can listen to Hindemith one minute then go listen to some Brahms, then go listen to some de Falla. I mean, for me, it isn't a problem going from Shostakovich to Faure. If something moves me, then I'm all for that.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

I'll be boringly conventional

Beethoven
Mozart
JS Bach
Haydn
Schubert

That doesn't mean I don't like alot of other composers from other periods as well. Also ranking those you like at the very top isn't that easy. How do you compare Mozart and Beethoven when one died much younger and the other could build upon what the other did? Comparing Haydn and Schubert is at least as unfair when you look at the difference in their ages at their death.


----------



## bassClef (Oct 29, 2006)

I'd like to hear some Ifukube, Tapkaara, can you recommend one disk as a taster ?


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

I'm answering in the spirit of the question: that is, these are my _personal_ favourites. (I don't claim to be ranking them as somehow 'the greatest'; I wouldn't know how to produce such a list.)

*1. Elgar.* He's been a lifetime companion. He's the reason why I grew to love classical music at all. I can't see hills and trees, or feel a breeze, without thinking of him and hearing his music, because it's so deeply rooted in the land.

*2. Handel.* I have been knocked out completely by this man, even though only a year ago I would have never believed it could be possible. Thank goodness for anniversaries that bring composers out into prominence periodically, and thank goodness for forums like this one which permit exchanges that can result in big personal breakthroughs. The tunes are breathtaking - so very many of them. The operas, the oratorios, the odes, the cantatas - packed full of drama and the most intense emotions across the whole range of human experience. I don't think I've actually experienced (I mean as direct personal insight, rather than just acknowledging the opinions of others) this degree of greatness in a composer before.

*3. Puccini. *The tunes are fantastic; unforgettable; and unforgettably moving. They run through my head time and again. His operas make me _feel_ experiences I could otherwise only imagine. I read that the music is not actually all that great technically, but I say: so what? What does that mean, when the music moves me so profoundly; after all, that's what it was written for.

*4. Vaughan Williams.* Where would I be without the Tallis Fantasia, the London Symphony, the 3rd and 5th symphonies, and the Phantasy Quintet? I love the timelessness of his music; the reaching back into the folk tradition so that there's always a hint of _centuries_ in what one hears, and that haunting pastoral mysticism that so often seems to lie behind the music.

*5. Probably Wagner,* because for years and years he provided me with an endless source of breathtaking musical experiences in _The Ring_ and _Tristan_; but I listen to him far less often these days, so he gets his place for pleasure past more than pleasure present. It could have been Sibelius (again, less now than formerly); or Massenet (_Manon_ alone would make him jostle for a place). But I'll go with Wagner just out of gratitude for old times.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Elgarian said:


> I'm answering in the spirit of the question: that is, these are my _personal_ favourites.


I did rank my personal favourites, they just happen to be generally considered to be great as well. I have just found more I like by them than others.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

jezbo said:


> I'd like to hear some Ifukube, Tapkaara, can you recommend one disk as a taster ?


There are two Naxos discs that are easy finds: Japanese Orchestral Favourites is a potpourri of different composers from Japan, and Ifukube's first orchestral work "Japanese Rhapsody" (1935) is included. It's a fine performance, albeit slower than normal. The other is a recording devoted to three of his works: Sinfonia Tapkaara, Ritmica Ostinata for Piano and Orchestra and Symphonic Fantasia no. 1. This is a very good album, though the recording of Ritmica Ostinata is probably the dullest ever commited to disc. It pains me that this is probably the first time new-comers hear Ritmica because the recording is so lifeless. The other two works are performed very well, interestingly enough.

For a more energetic recording of Ritmica and some of the composers chamber works for piano (including two world premieres!), try Akira Ifukube: Works for Piano vol. I. This is recently released as of December. The pianist is Reiko Yamada, a former pupil of the composer.

YouTube has quite a few samplings of Ifukube's work - you can always listen right away and for free there...just do a search for his name.

And for general info about him, visit www.akiraifukube.org. It's a site that I run and there is info on there on how to order the Yamada disc.. Hope that helps!!


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

starry said:


> I did rank my personal favourites, they just happen to be generally considered to be great as well. I have just found more I like by them than others.


Yes I'm sure you did - I wasn't questioning what you or anyone else had done; I just wanted to state clearly what _I_ was doing, to avoid any misunderstanding.


----------



## Lisztfreak (Jan 4, 2007)

I worship this pantheon:

*Beethoven* - God of Gods.
*Brahms, Liszt, Shostakovich, Vaughan Williams *- The Four Gods.

Debussy, Janáček, Britten, Schubert, Schumann, Sibelius, Elgar, Tippett, Bruckner - the Archangels.

Tchaikovsky, Delius, Holst, Fauré, Nielsen, Mahler, Bartók, Rachmaninov, Chopin, Chausson, Roussel, Poulenc, Enescu, Prokofiev, Honegger, Weber, Händel, Haydn, Ravel, Purcell, Respighi, Méhul, Dvorak, Saint-Saens, Pejacevic - the Angels.


----------



## David C Coleman (Nov 23, 2007)

I seem to remember a top ten favourite composers or twenty, or something thread a while ago, but my top five do tend to fluctuate a little. But I'm going to put dear Ludwig at the top, because of what a giant of music he was (is). Then would come Mozart for being ....erm such a giant of music.
After that, well..Bruckner, Mahler, Sibelius perhaps, mainly for their unique soundworlds.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

I think for most of us, Beethoven is probably a given. Though I did not list him in my top 2, I think in a way, he's above all of that. All lists should contain him automatically, and then you can list everyone else.

After all, he is the single greatest figure in all of wester music, is he not?


----------



## kg4fxg (May 24, 2009)

*Posting a new thread*

What do you have to do in this forum to be able to post a new thread?

Thanks


----------



## livemylife (Mar 13, 2009)

This is rather difficult.

1) Rachmaninoff: He would be my most favorite.
2) Chausson
3) Sibelius
4) Brahms
5) Dvorak/Chopin


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

livemylife said:


> This is rather difficult.
> 
> 1) Rachmaninoff: He would be my most favorite.
> 2) Chausson
> ...


That's a beautiful list! Chausson is such an underrated composer. I actually started a thread about him over in the "Composer's Guestbook" section, so please come by and share your thoughts on this amazing composer.


----------



## livemylife (Mar 13, 2009)

Yes Chausson is amazing. I like every Chausson piece I've heard. Some more than others, but I do like all of them.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

livemylife said:


> Yes Chausson is amazing. I like every Chausson piece I've heard. Some more than others, but I do like all of them.


"Symphony in B flat" and "Poème de l'amour et de la mer" are two of my favorite pieces.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

kg4fxg said:


> What do you have to do in this forum to be able to post a new thread?
> 
> Thanks


Click on the name of the board where you want to post your new thread (classical music discussion, opera, musicians, members talk, etc) and then click on 'new thread' in the top left hand corner.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

> After all, he is the single greatest figure in all of western music, is he not?


Ehhh...I personally feel JS Bach is more deserving of this title than Beethoven. I'm not speaking from personal taste(Mozart is my favorite), but just in terms of his contributions to music.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

trazom said:


> Ehhh...I personally feel JS Bach is more deserving of this title than Beethoven. I'm not speaking from personal taste(Mozart is my favorite), but just in terms of his contributions to music.


Bach is no doubt up there.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

trazom said:


> Ehhh...I personally feel JS Bach is more deserving of this title than Beethoven. I'm not speaking from personal taste(Mozart is my favorite), but just in terms of his contributions to music.


This specific thread is about your own personal favorite composers not who's the greatest.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

I guess I'll just list my top 5 composers. Hmmmmm...this is tough.

Mozart- I can't explain why, or maybe I can. It's the symmetry and perfection of form in his music that is STILL able to be strikingly beautiful, despite being conventional, that impresses me. And the texture of his music is so ethereal, it manages to sound "happy" to the casual listener, but there's always this undertone of sadness/loneliness. It's usually expressed in a slowing of tempo and ascent in semitones that gives the music this pulling feeling, like a crawl.And there's this wit in his music, the way he manipulates previously used melodies in original and satisfying ways, that I don't really hear a lot with the later composers.I've been stuck on his music for a few years now. I have all his 27 piano concertos nearly memorized by heart(Okay, except for the first four). And I still constantly listen to about 20 of his symphonies, 4 of his operas, even his piano sonatas and many other compositions and LASTLY, I'm always finding a new phrase/idea in his pieces that I haven't previously heard before each time I listen. It's wonderful.


AND it looks like I've worn myself out too much to express my praise for my other choice composers, but they are:

JS Bach
Rachmaninoff
Brahms
Chopin/Schubert/Wagner - Okay, I cheated with the last one; but I tried, darn it!


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

trazom said:


> I guess I'll just list my top 5 composers. Hmmmmm...this is tough.
> 
> Mozart- I can't explain why, or maybe I can. It's the symmetry and perfection of form in his music that is STILL able to be strikingly beautiful, despite being conventional, that impresses me. And the texture of his music is so ethereal, it manages to sound "happy" to the casual listener, but there's always this undertone of sadness/loneliness. It's usually expressed in a slowing of tempo and ascent in semitones that gives the music this pulling feeling, like a crawl.And there's this wit in his music, the way he manipulates previously used melodies in original and satisfying ways, that I don't really hear a lot with the later composers.I've been stuck on his music for a few years now. I have all his 27 piano concertos nearly memorized by heart(Okay, except for the first four). And I still constantly listen to about 20 of his symphonies, 4 of his operas, even his piano sonatas and many other compositions and LASTLY, I'm always finding a new phrase/idea in his pieces that I haven't previously heard before each time I listen. It's wonderful.
> 
> ...


Alright, Brahms and Rachmaninov. Two great composers that I return to often, especially Brahms.


----------



## bassClef (Oct 29, 2006)

Tapkaara said:


> There are two Naxos discs that are easy finds: Japanese Orchestral Favourites is a potpourri of different composers from Japan, and Ifukube's first orchestral work "Japanese Rhapsody" (1935) is included. It's a fine performance, albeit slower than normal. The other is a recording devoted to three of his works: Sinfonia Tapkaara, Ritmica Ostinata for Piano and Orchestra and Symphonic Fantasia no. 1. This is a very good album, though the recording of Ritmica Ostinata is probably the dullest ever commited to disc. It pains me that this is probably the first time new-comers hear Ritmica because the recording is so lifeless. The other two works are performed very well, interestingly enough.
> 
> For a more energetic recording of Ritmica and some of the composers chamber works for piano (including two world premieres!), try Akira Ifukube: Works for Piano vol. I. This is recently released as of December. The pianist is Reiko Yamada, a former pupil of the composer.
> 
> ...


Thanks - I had already put the second of those two disks in my Amazon basket, as it happens! Cheap too! I've sampled some tracks on line, and they sound just my cup of tea 

Are you familiar with Yasushi Akutagawa, do you rate his music? This looks a good deal too - and again I like the samples.

(Perhaps we should start another thread on Japanese composers ...)


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

jezbo said:


> Thanks - I had already put the second of those two disks in my Amazon basket, as it happens! Cheap too! I've sampled some tracks on line, and they sound just my cup of tea
> 
> Are you familiar with Yasushi Akutagawa, do you rate his music? This looks a good deal too - and again I like the samples.
> 
> (Perhaps we should start another thread on Japanese composers ...)


Akutagawa is great and the Naxos disc is spectacular. He has more of a Prokofiev/Shostakovich sound. His works are, for the most part, achingly tuneful and full of good, wicked humor. I say go for it!


----------



## bassClef (Oct 29, 2006)

Tapkaara said:


> Akutagawa is great and the Naxos disc is spectacular. He has more of a Prokofiev/Shostakovich sound. His works are, for the most part, achingly tuneful and full of good, wicked humor. I say go for it!


Will do! If I really like these I may be asking you for more recommendations...


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

jezbo said:


> Will do! If I really like these I may be asking you for more recommendations...


Well, I hope you enjoy and I'll look forward to hearing (or reading, as the case may be) your thoughts.


----------



## bdelykleon (May 21, 2009)

Is this Akutagawa related in any form to the famous writer Ryunosuke Akutagawa (from Rashomon, In a Grove and many other short stories)?


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

bdelykleon said:


> Is this Akutagawa related in any form to the famous writer Ryunosuke Akutagawa (from Rashomon, In a Grove and many other short stories)?


Funny you should ask. Yes, Yasushi is Ryunosuke's son. Perhaps we should move our discussion here:

http://www.talkclassical.com/5085-japanese-composers.html


----------



## andruini (Apr 14, 2009)

1. Stravinsky - Well, I really can't say why, but his music really hits me in a very guttural way.. It's as if everytime I hear The Rite, or Petrouchka, or Symphony of Psalms or any other, my whole body pulsates with the rythms.. I can feel myself moving toward the music and with it.. He's really special to me..

2. Brahms - Well, there's not much to say here, except that there's nothing like a good Brahms melody and a thick Brahms harmony..

3. Debussy - The same as Stravinsky, except that not in a guttural way.. More of a spiritual thing, if you get my drift.. It always seems that no matter how I'm feeling, there's a Debussy piece to suit that mood. Lovely..

4. Fauré - Well, apart from the Requiem, which is, I think, my all-time favorite classical piece, there's not a single work of his which hasn't spoken to me in a very particular manner.. He really put his soul into his music, and that comes through.. He was truly an exquisite human being, with some complex emotions..

And I'm gonna go out on a limb a bit here, because this is a composer who I just started getting REALLY into..
5. Barber - I don't know what it is about him.. He was just a really special human being, and that really shows in his music.. Every single thing I've heard of his really amazes me.. Some of his harmonies are just breathtaking..

And well, the hall of fame: Bach, Chopin, Prokofiev, Janácek, Smetana, Nielsen, Sibelius, Dvorák, Vierne, Copland, Mozart, Schubert, Wagner, Poulenc, Widor.. etc. etc.

(And of course, Beethoven goes beyond the list!)


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

andruini said:


> 1. Stravinsky - Well, I really can't say why, but his music really hits me in a very guttural way.. It's as if everytime I hear The Rite, or Petrouchka, or Symphony of Psalms or any other, my whole body pulsates with the rythms.. I can feel myself moving toward the music and with it.. He's really special to me..
> 
> 2. Brahms - Well, there's not much to say here, except that there's nothing like a good Brahms melody and a thick Brahms harmony..
> 
> ...


Great list! Barber and Faure are so underrated.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

How do you differentiate between 'favourite' composers and those who you think are the 'greatest'?

Looking through I think people sometimes list composers as a particular piece has really appealed to them, or they feel a composer has perhaps been underrated or maybe they feel a particular affinity with a particular composer.

Now there are some composers who have done pieces that excite me who have been listed here, such as Elgar 1st symphony or Enigma, or Bruckner 7th symphony, Brahms 4th etc, Holst's Jupiter, Vaughan William's Tallis Fantasia, some Handel arias, Sibelius 5th, Debussy's Faun, some Faure. Same with Schumann who's 3rd symphony is great, or various Tchaikovsky pieces (like R+J) , Dvorak Serenade for Strings, Wagner's Tristan Prelude. etc etc But I wouldn't feel honest listing them in my top 5 as other composers I feel have just done more good work which I have enjoyed. 

And I don't think I could really feel an affinity to the extent of feeling a connection with a composer as a person....because I never knew them. I don't know if for instance I had met Beethoven or Mozart whether I would have found them pleasant people, or whether they would have found me pleasant. So I can only really judge things with my opinion on their music.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

starry said:


> How do you differentiate between 'favourite' composers and those who you think are the 'greatest'?
> 
> Looking through I think people sometimes list composers as a particular piece has really appealed to them, or they feel a composer has perhaps been underrated or maybe they feel a particular affinity with a particular composer.
> 
> ...


Honestly, Starry, you're making this WAY TOO DIFFICULT!!! This isn't Nuclear Physics, I'm just asking a very simple question: who are your 5 favorite composers and why? The question itself is rather simple, but yes it does require you to think and ponder on what composers inspire you and that appeal to you.

When I say favorite it is your subjective opinion about a composer and answering why they appeal to you. If this were a greatest composers of all-time thread, then I would hope that list would purely objective.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Mirror Image said:


> Honestly, Starry, you're making this WAY TOO DIFFICULT!!! This isn't Nuclear Physics, I'm just asking a very simple question: who are your 5 favorite composers and why? The question itself is rather simple, but yes it does require you to think and ponder on what composers inspire you and that appeal to you.
> 
> When I say favorite it is your subjective opinion about a composer and answering why they appeal to you. If this were a greatest composers of all-time thread, then I would hope that list would purely objective.


But on that basis aren't all opinions subjective, including that of whether one composer is greater than another. All I'm saying is I don't really see the difference. A composer you think is the greatest is also likely to inspire or appeal to you the most as well. Unless when drawing up a 'greatest' list people feel compelled to list names they feel they are supposed to rather than want to. I think it's much easier listing favourite pieces where you don't have to side with a composer's whole output.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

starry said:


> But on that basis aren't all opinions subjective, including that of whether one composer is greater than another. All I'm saying is I don't really see the difference. A composer you think is the greatest is also likely to inspire or appeal to you the most as well. Unless when drawing up a 'greatest' list people feel compelled to list names they feel they are supposed to rather than want to. I think it's much easier listing favourite pieces where you don't have to side with a composer's whole output.


Again, you're making too much of this, Starry my dear.

Let me say that this thread is about your own personal favorite classical composers and if I knew that this was going to be something that people, like yourself, were going to agonize over it, then perhaps I shouldn't have created the thread in the first place.

The question, again, is very simple, but requires you to search deep inside of yourself for the answer. Only you know who you like and are inspired by. Nobody, but you, can answer this question.

It doesn't need to be something that you struggle with. You either know who are your favorites or you do not.

All of this is actually incredibly simple to answer, that is, if truly know what you like.

I will also say that a "greatest" list is exactly what it is. A list of composers that were influential not only to people who listened, but other composers too. This, Starry, is were being objective is most important. Bach, Beethoven, Haydn, and Mozart are examples of the greatest composers of all-time, because they influenced classical and continue to do so. They helped shape classical music with their influence. Are these composers my personal favorites? Absolutely not, but I was being objective and looking at the history of this music and judging from history they are in the top 5.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

jhar26 said:


> -1 *Mozart* - The first time I heard works like Le Nozze di Figaro, Cosi Fan Tutte, the Clarinet Quintet, Requiem, Mass in C minor and the piano concertos I couldn't believe my ears. I didn't know it was possible for music to sound so absolutely perfect and otherworldly beautiful. I'm not a religious guy, but sometimes when I listen to Mozart's music I have my doubts.


I remember being in another forum and I made the comment that, while I myself am not religious, listening to a good piece of music can create what I would call a religious experience. I was promptly sneered at by one of the resident faithful and he said something to the tune of: "If you, by your own admission, are not religious, how would you even know what a religious experience feels like?"

So much for admitting to one of the faithful that I might, at times, believe in God!


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> I remember being in another forum and I made the comment that, while I myself am not religious, listening to a good piece of music can create what I would call a religious experience. I was promptly sneered at by one of the resident faithful and he said something to the tune of: "If you, by your own admission, are not religious, how would you even know what a religious experience feels like?"
> 
> So much for admitting to one of the faithful that I might, at times, believe in God!


When are you going to write some more reviews on Amazon, Erik?


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Mirror Image said:


> When are you going to write some more reviews on Amazon, Erik?


I dunno. Was into it for a while but I've lost my spark as far as that is concerned. Some of my reviews were pretty good, some of them sort of lousy. At least my earlier ones are. They take a lot of energy, anyhow, and maybe if I really get excited about something one day, I'll write another.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> I dunno. Was into it for a while but I've lost my spark as far as that is concerned. Some of my reviews were pretty good, some of them sort of lousy. At least my earlier ones are. They take a lot of energy, anyhow, and maybe if I really get excited about something one day, I'll write another.


I write quite a few myself. If I'm really excited about a recording I usually write about it, but like you, I have lost that spark to continue writing.

I have written a lot of jazz reviews and few classical ones.


----------



## Praine (Dec 20, 2008)

Wow, Mirror Image. I knew you liked Berlioz, but seeing him at your number 2 spot, above Mahler and Bruckner, who you continously praise, was quite unexpected. 

1. *Vaughan Williams* - He just uses such intricate and unique harmonies that define his sound which amazes me through all of his works and keeps me running back for more. The first symphony I heard of his that really connected me with him was his 3rd "Pastoral" Symphony and remains to be my favorite. It also really helps when you follow this man's life and compare his pre-war works to that following the WWI (like the lively sound of the London Symphony to the bleak, intense sound shown in the 6th Symphony). For the major emotional connection I have with this man's music, he is in my number one spot.

2. *Ravel* - Ever since I started listening to classical music, I was longing for a sound just like Ravel's. The mystical and harmonious textures that is incorporated into his almighty music deserves nothing but praise. Le Tombeau de Couperin and Daphnis et Chloe are two pieces of art that I would now be lost without.

3. *Mahler* - While most people seem to hold his 5th symphony close to their heart, the symphony that introduced me to Mahler was his 4th. It also remains to be my favorite. I just adore the unique Christmas-y sort of feel that it has with the jingle bells ringing at the beginning of the first movement. What is special about Mahler, is his ability to connect his works with one another. For example, the 5th movement of the 3rd Symphony and the first movement of his 4th both reoccur in the final movement in the 4th Symphony in such a fashion that can only be defined as "awesome".

4. *Bruckner* - Massive brass, massive emotion and an overal grand sound is something I always look forward to while listening to Bruckner. I really enjoy his scherzos, particularily in his first and seventh symphony. I know one should listen to an entire symphony to get the "whole effect", but if I only had 10 minutes, I would spend it listening to the 3rd movement of his 7th symphony any day.

5. *Brahms* - Sometimes I imagine him having the ability to cast fireballs as he's walking down the street with the supreme musical knowledge that he possesses. He's a master, and shows his musical genius in pretty well everything he does.

So those are my top 5 composers. I actually typed this all up yesterday, but lost my post when I pressed 'backspace' (I guess I wasn't typing in the text box anymore and it took me to the previous page) so my definitions most likely differ from what I had yesterday. Nonetheless, I hope you enjoyed them.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Reign of Praine must be Mirror's long lost Siamese twin.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Reign of Praine said:


> Wow, Mirror Image. I knew you liked Berlioz, but seeing him at your number 2 spot, above Mahler and Bruckner, who you continously praise, was quite unexpected.
> 
> 1. *Vaughan Williams* - He just uses such intricate and unique harmonies that define his sound which amazes me through all of his works and keeps me running back for more. The first symphony I heard of his that really connected me with him was his 3rd "Pastoral" Symphony and remains to be my favorite. It also really helps when you follow this man's life and compare his pre-war works to that following the WWI (like the lively sound of the London Symphony to the bleak, intense sound shown in the 6th Symphony). For the major emotional connection I have with this man's music, he is in my number one spot.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I'm a Berlioz freak. Everybody on this forum will tell you that. You have a GREAT list by the way! 

My goodness Ravel, Vaughan Williams, Mahler, Brahms, and Bruckner. I think I have found my twin!


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> Reign of Praine must be Mirror's long lost Siamese twin.


Well, there's nothing wrong with that! He's got exquisite tastes in music. That I do know.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Mirror Image said:


> Again, you're making too much of this, Starry my dear.
> 
> Let me say that this thread is about your own personal favorite classical composers and if I knew that this was going to be something that people, like yourself, were going to agonize over it, then perhaps I shouldn't have created the thread in the first place.
> 
> It doesn't need to be something that you struggle with.


Well I'm sorry but I like to think about things, it's my nature lol. I like to think it can stimulate debate and thought.



Mirror Image said:


> I will also say that a "greatest" list is exactly what it is. A list of composers that were influential not only to people who listened, but other composers too. This, Starry, is were being objective is most important. Bach, Beethoven, Haydn, and Mozart are examples of the greatest composers of all-time, because they influenced classical and continue to do so. They helped shape classical music with their influence. Are these composers my personal favorites? Absolutely not, but I was being objective and looking at the history of this music and judging from history they are in the top 5.


But your reason there for who is the greatest is a matter of opinion. I might say the greatest are those who I feel have produced the most great music, who have the best overall output. And they could well be my personal favourites as well as they have produced more music I have liked than others and so have given me more enjoyment.

Questions of influence are harder to define perhaps and some of that can be dependent on who writes the history of music or what the fashion is at a particular time. Also influence can be good but it can also be bad. Schoenberg may well have had a huge influence on modern classical music but I definitely wouldn't put him among the *very* greatest just for that reason. Same for Debussy. For the 19th century Beethoven was considered by far the greatest and Mozart except for a few pieces was probably thought of a lot less, some of that was just fashion. In the 18th century JS Bach had relatively little influence and was unknown or just considered antique.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

starry said:


> Well I'm sorry but I like to think about things, it's my nature lol. I like to think it can stimulate debate and thought.
> 
> But your reason there for who is the greatest is a matter of opinion. I might say the greatest are those who I feel have produced the most great music, who have the best overall output. And they could well be my personal favourites as well as they have produced more music I have liked than others and so have given me more enjoyment.
> 
> Questions of influence are harder to define perhaps and some of that can be dependent on who writes the history of music or what the fashion is at a particular time. Also influence can be good but it can also be bad. Schoenberg may well have had a huge influence on modern classical music but I definitely wouldn't put him among the *very* greatest just for that reason. Same for Debussy. For the 19th century Beethoven was considered by far the greatest and Mozart except for a few pieces was probably thought of a lot less, some of that was just fashion. In the 18th century JS Bach had relatively little influence and was unknown or just considered antique.


With your logic, everything is opinion-based. This is not the case when I mention: Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn, etc. There is no debate that these composers influenced and changed classical music forever. It's in the history books and their influence are found throughout music.

Their music and influence are talked about in schools, colleges, in music magazines, etc. This is not opinion, Starry, This is fact. There's a difference.

If I were to say I think Beethoven was a great composer, that's an opinion. Here's a fact, Beethoven was a transitional figure in classical and helped usher in Romanticism. There's a difference between opinion and fact.

I'm not sure how much you read about classical music, but I think not recognizing the influence of these composers is insulting not only to me, but to the history of the music.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Here is my list of the 5 most influential composers of all-time:

1. Bach
2. Haydn
3. Mozart
4. Beethoven
5. Wagner


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Mirror Image said:


> With your logic, everything is opinion-based. This is not the case when I mention: Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn, etc. There is no debate that these composers influenced and changed classical music forever. It's in the history books and their influence are found throughout music.
> 
> Their music and influence are talked about in schools, colleges, in music magazines, etc. This is not opinion, Starry, This is fact. There's a difference.
> 
> If I were to say I think Beethoven was a great composer, that's an opinion. Here's a fact, Beethoven was a transitional figure in classical and helped usher in Romanticism. There's a difference between opinion and fact.


I don't think the quality of music is really opinion based, Beethoven for example was prolific and he did alot of generally recognised fine pieces. That's just looking at the music on it's own terms within the period it was written.

But when you get into music history and who influenced each other, who was revolutionary, who was supposed to lead the way to whatever the next era is supposed to be according to musicologists......that is opinion. Things like that are subject to the fashion of the time.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

Tapkaara said:


> I remember being in another forum and I made the comment that, while I myself am not religious, listening to a good piece of music can create what I would call a religious experience. I was promptly sneered at by one of the resident faithful and he said something to the tune of: "If you, by your own admission, are not religious, how would you even know what a religious experience feels like?"


Looks as if the post by Gaston that you quoted has disappeared - which is a shame, as I'd like to have read it.

I think what's being picked up here is really important. In a 'religious experience' one usually has the feeling of an encounter with something (or someone) of great significance beyond oneself; it's often beyond words to describe; there's no language in which one can pin it down, and yet one 'knows' that it is intensely important. Something very similar happens with a big 'art' experience: the composer or artist is communicating with us so intimately, so powerfully - and from 'outside ourselves' - and the experience can't be adequately expressed or explained afterwards.

In the case of the 'art' experience there is (or was) a real artist responsible for this communication. We really are communicating with someone, and everyone can recognise that. In the case of the 'religious experience', it's not at all clear with whom (or with what) one is communicating, and so it's either dismissed as an emotional phantasm (by the non-religious), or attributed to a divine source (by the religious). Either way, the same kind of spiritual/psychological [choose whichever you think best] activity seems to be involved. It's no accident that music and painting and literature have always been involved as an integral part of religious activity.

Dragging this back to the topic in hand - any composer who makes it into my list of favourites has to offer me at least a glimmer of this kind of transcendent vision. Any composer who doesn't could never become a 'favourite', however great they might be considered in general in terms of influence, technical development, etc.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Elgarian said:


> Looks as if the post by Gaston that you quoted has disappeared - which is a shame, as I'd like to have read it.


I've deleted it myself because I wasn't happy with it. But I'm seldom happy with any of my own posts. I mean what I've said in the bit about Mozart though.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

starry said:


> Questions of influence are harder to define perhaps and some of that can be dependent on who writes the history of music or what the fashion is at a particular time.


I agree completely with what you say here. The history of art is littered with the casualties of shifting fashion; the list of who is considered 'best' at any one period depends entirely on whatever the current criteria are for 'best'. When those criteria change (as they continually do), the list changes. Look at the way the PreRaphaelites were dismissed and sank into contemptuous oblivion for decades until they were 'rediscovered' in the 1970s; track the varying fortunes of the reputations of writers like Scott, or Tennyson, or Ruskin; or, in music, Elgar. And for goodness' sake - look at the 200 years of utter neglect of Handel's operas.

The facts of cultural history are that the criteria for what is most admirable _do_ change; and any attempt at 'objectivity' must always be subject to certain reservations because of that.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

jhar26 said:


> I've deleted it myself because I wasn't happy with it. But I'm seldom happy with any of my own posts.


I think you're not alone in that - I never feel that I've expressed myself properly. But if you feel like having another go in this case, I can guarantee you at least one interested reader.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Elgarian said:


> the composer or artist is communicating with us so intimately, so powerfully - and from 'outside ourselves' - and the experience can't be adequately expressed or explained afterwards.
> 
> Dragging this back to the topic in hand - any composer who makes it into my list of favourites has to offer me at least a glimmer of this kind of transcendent vision.


Don't forget the role the performer has in this as well. For much music we cannot hear the composer performing a work, we are dependent on an intermediary. Even the recording sound quality could affect the appreciation of some pieces.

There have probably been quite a few composers who have given me a 'transcendent vision' at one time or another so I'm not sure that that on it's own is enough for me to whittle down my favourite composers to 5 or even perhaps many more. Then there is the matter of trying to rank composers within that. That's why I think I'd need to lean back on the overall number of quality pieces I feel a composer does.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Elgarian said:


> Looks as if the post by Gaston that you quoted has disappeared - which is a shame, as I'd like to have read it.
> 
> I think what's being picked up here is really important. In a 'religious experience' one usually has the feeling of an encounter with something (or someone) of great significance beyond oneself; it's often beyond words to describe; there's no language in which one can pin it down, and yet one 'knows' that it is intensely important. Something very similar happens with a big 'art' experience: the composer or artist is communicating with us so intimately, so powerfully - and from 'outside ourselves' - and the experience can't be adequately expressed or explained afterwards.
> 
> ...


A beautiful and true commentary.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Roughly in order:

Varese
Bartok
Prokofiev
Britten
Walton

& a further 5:

Henze
Piazzolla
Barry Conyngham (Australian composer)
Bloch
Bliss


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Andre said:


> Roughly in order:
> 
> Varese
> Bartok
> ...


I'm with you on the Bartok, Prokofiev, Britten, Bloch, and Bliss.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I think that I also should have found room for Haydn. Have been rediscovering his _London symphonies_ lately. I think he's an underrated genius...


----------



## Conservationist (Apr 5, 2007)

Mirror Image said:


> Who are your five favorite composers and why? Please try and limit the number of composers to 5.
> 
> 3. Bruckner - I just love everything about this man's music. Those very vast soundscapes that take shape, from out of nowhere, and just pummel you with their emotional outpouring. Mystical, religious, eye-opening, and thought-provoking are all things that I attach to Bruckner's music and these are the qualities that keep me coming back.


Agreed for the above reason -- fantastic art -- and also use of sonic texture.

Here's four more:

1. Robert Schumann - captures the Faustian spirit in a practical, lovely and not quite sentimental way.

2. Ottorino Respighi - evokes the ancient spirit through modern interpretations of early music and baroque.

3. Ludwig van Beethoven - music never got better.

4. Saint-Saens - there is no more challenging piece of sonic art than his third symphony. Designed to make you re-assess your cognitive filters, and utterly beautiful.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Conservationist said:


> 4. Saint-Saens - there is no more challenging piece of sonic art than his third symphony. Designed to make you re-assess your cognitive filters, and utterly beautiful.


I think there are plenty of pieces much more challenging than that!


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> I think there are plenty of pieces much more challenging than that!


Agreed, there are plenty... I 'understood' Saint-Saens' _Organ Symphony _when I was a teenager. I now think that Poulenc's _Concerto for Organ, Strings & Timpani _has more meat to sink my teeth into, if you know what I mean (if you are looking for something in roughly the same genre by a French composer)...


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

For a knock-down-drag-out "organ symphony" that is not very challenging but utterly awesome in its unashamed bombast, check the 3rd Symphony of Khachaturian. Makes the Saint-Saens sound like an ice cream truck going by your house at 3 miles an hour.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> Makes the Saint-Saens sound like an ice cream truck going by your house at 3 miles an hour.


I wasn't aware that music was a contest, Tapkaaara. Look at the years the Saint-Saens "Organ Symphony" was composed and Khachaturian's 3rd symphony was composed. Here you go trying to compare apples and oranges again.

Khachaturian: Symphony No. 3 - *1947*
Saint-Saens: Symphony No. 3 "Organ" - *1886*

Music changed quite a bit between the years 1886 through 1947.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Mirror Image said:


> I wasn't aware that music was a contest, Tapkaaara. Look at the years the Saint-Saens "Organ Symphony" was composed and Khacahaturian's 3rd symphony was composed. Here you go trying to compare apples and oranges again.


Oh come on, MI...lighten up!


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Tapkaara said:


> Oh come on, MI...lighten up!


I'm just making a point to you. That's all I'm doing. My point is very direct:

Khachaturian: Symphony No. 3 - *1947*
Saint-Saens: Symphony No. 3 "Organ" - *1886*


----------



## BuddhaBandit (Dec 31, 2007)

I figured I'd list my five (as of now):

Stravinsky
Bach
Ives
Bartok
Haydn


----------



## JAKE WYB (May 28, 2009)

In order - 

1. SIBELIUS - his soundworlds are unsurpassed at taking you to unexplored areas of music - and there is no-one who creates such a sound of quality and otherworldlyness - he is as far as i can see the only composer who writes music that often transcends what is expected to be by a human imagination 

2. VAUGHAN WILLIAMS - makes me feel at home and comfortable when the country around is going down the plughole

3. BARTOK - how he gets the mixture of historic depth of cultures and intense innovation just right in always visceral and exciting music that is always expertly proportioned and structure - he has an excellent sense of colour and orchestration - he never gets over- colourful like prokofiev or stravinsky

4. JANACEK - he had his own way of doing things and never conventionalised - making his music unique and powerful in its rough hewn yet very subtle way - manages to be both frightening disturbing yet heart warming and friendly simultaneously

5. BAX - the most underrated british composer of the 20th century - has a unique primordial celticy soundworld taking you away - but unlike sibelius he is often marvellously rich and generous and engulfs you into the music whereas sibelius often is austere and alienating


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

JAKE WYB said:


> In order -
> 
> 1. SIBELIUS - his soundworlds are unsurpassed at taking you to unexplored areas of music - and there is no-one who creates such a sound of quality and otherworldlyness - he is as far as i can see the only composer who writes music that often transcends what is expected to be by a human imagination
> 
> ...


Some absolutely first-rate picks there, Jake. I love all these composers immensely.

I think Bax is ONE of the most underrated British composers. There are several more composers that I feel are underrated as well like John Ireland, Bliss, Finzi, and Rubbra. I think these composers stars have yet to shine.


----------



## Metalheadwholovesclasical (Mar 15, 2008)

I forgot if I had already posted here, but oh well.

1.) Ludwig Van Beethoven
The very composer that first got me started in classical music. The emotion in his pieces and the passion he put in his music are phenomenal. Beethoven just sticks out more than any other composer in my eyes.

2.) Johann Sebastian Bach
Bach's pieces have an incredible structure to them. I don't really know exactly why I like him, but there is something about his music's structure that really hooks me. His organ pieces are addicting.

3.) Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
I really did not get into Mozart until later on. What I like in Mozart's pieces is his playful tone in his music. His music is mainly very cheerful and fun.

4.) Igor Stravinsky
Igor's music is very unique compared to other composers. His ballet "Rite of Spring" is among one of the most superb ballets I have heard, and reigns as one of my favorite pieces.

5.) Pytor Ilyich Tchaikovsky
Really don't have much to say about Tchaikovsky, I really don't know what really makes me like his pieces so much, but they are fantastic.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

O.K.: I can do five. Five's a manageable number...

1. *Richard Wagner*: No more direct conduit from artistic creation to the ambit of human emotion exists in all of music... nay, all of ART!

2. *Ludwig van Beethoven*: Casual listeners know of Beethoven's gift for musical majesty- but his palette also contains musical humor (e.g.: Symphony 8), tenderness (e.g. "Moonlight" sonata), and delicacy (e.g. sections of the "Razumovsky" quartets).

3. *Tchaikovsky*: In addition to being the greatest melodist in the history of Western Music, there is that "masterpieces in every genre" point that Hot_town/Philly (wife) brings up.

4. *Gustav Mahler*: To my mind, the most unique "musical voice" post-Wagner. He, too, has a tremendous 'color-range.'

5. *Anton Bruckner*: I came to Bruckner later in life- but his his sweep, scope and musical declamations finally resonated with me. The man from Ansfelden was fond of architectural analogies- and his constructions weren't fully accepted by the world until well after his death...


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

Bach
Beethoven
Wagner
Debussy
Stravinsky

Not really in order..


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Bach said:


> Bach
> Beethoven
> Wagner
> Debussy
> ...


Stravinsky is in your top 5, Bach? That's great. One hell of a composer.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

Favorite composers, as chosen by the people who've posted in this thread so far...

1. *Beethoven*, 2. "Raif"

positions 3/4/5/6: Mahler/Bruckner/Bach/Brahms (too lazy to weight them right now).

I know it's "favorite," and not "greatest/best," but "Raif" second? Absolutely stunning.


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

Mirror Image said:


> Stravinsky is in your top 5, Bach? That's great. One hell of a composer.


Oh hell, I couldn't really justify missing him out - from beginning to end, a true eclectic and the only definitive 20th century composer.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Chi_town/Philly said:


> Favorite composers, as chosen by the people who've posted in this thread so far...
> 
> 1. *Beethoven*, 2. "Raif"
> 
> ...


Raif is popular around here, no doubt. A little surprising to me, too.


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

"Raif"

As in RVW.. his music is light and pretty, that's why.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Bach said:


> "Raif"
> 
> As in RVW.. his music is light and pretty, that's why.


Hehehehehehe...


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

Whut...?


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Bach said:


> Whut...?


Light and pretty. How...insulting, Bach. Really!


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

And true...


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Well Bach I'm glad you enjoy Stravinsky, because he's one of my favorites.


----------



## JAKE WYB (May 28, 2009)

Bach said:


> "Raif"
> 
> As in RVW.. his music is light and pretty, that's why.


you clearly never heard symphony 4, or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9, or JOB


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

I have actually.. they don't represent him at his best. Watered down modernism doesn't sit comfortably with his pastoral aesthetic.


----------



## Rondo (Jul 11, 2007)

To list 5 (as opposed to 1 or, 15) isn't as easy as it seems. The only way I can determine this is to put down the five composers whose works are, according to my best guess, the most populous in my media library. And they are:


Beethoven
Shostakovich
Mahler
Arnold
John Williams (film composer)

-_very_ close runners-up:

Nielsen
Bartok
Sibelius

As to why....I like them?


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Rondo said:


> The only way I can determine this is to put down the five composers whose works are, according to my best guess, the most populous in my media library.


That is the best way, those who you like the most music from.


----------



## Mirror Image (Apr 20, 2009)

Bach said:


> I have actually.. they don't represent him at his best. Watered down modernism doesn't sit comfortably with his pastoral aesthetic.


You know Bach you make an excellent point here. I think that Vaughan Williams' best music is the music where that trademark lyricism comes through loud and clear. My favorite symphonies are A Sea Symphony, A London Symphony, A Pastoral Symphony, and Symphony No. 5. I find the others to lack that melodic and lyrical quality that these symphonies convey. Also, his shorter works are great examples of this lyricism: Five Variants on Wives and Lazarus, The Lark Ascending, In the Fen Country, Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis, Flos Campi, Norfolk Rhapsody, etc. Edgy modernism isn't his bag at all.


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

'zackly bro


----------



## Scott Good (Jun 8, 2009)

Well, favorite is a very tricky word, as there are some many different reasons to listen to any one composer, or said piece of that composer. Entirely depends on my mood.

But, on the artist side, there are certain composers who have been constant inspiretion for me - and from the first utterances of their music till right this second! 

Here they are:

1. Bach - I idolize everything about his music - but it's not just the music, but the life in music. Unswayed by popularity, he strove to achieve the best in what he could do. And he was such an explorer. Any ideas could come in and take part of his musical language. 

He never stopped growing as an artist as well. Right up until the end. He is my strongest beacon through the murky waters of what has become of classical composition.

2. Shostakovitch - He was my first love of the orchestral composers, and will forever take a strong place in my heart. A consummate craftsman as there ever was. Tremendous passion paired with crisp and clear structures. No composer makes my blood boil more than him.

3. Palestrina - It is through his art that one can understand fully the basis of all functional western harmony. His music is like a perfectly cut crystal. I am indebted to him for so much of my technique (as are all composers!).

4. Schoenberg - His travels through functional harmony, to set class constructions, and finally 12 tone technique were perhaps the most revolutionary thing to happen to Western music since Machaut. He developed a way to organize pitch material in a way that both connects and utterly departs from the traditional system. It is logical, elegant, and incredibly flexible, and maintains the thread that connects the modern world to the ancient.

5. Ligeti - He symbolizes to me that modern music and the "avant garde" so to speak are just the beginning of something, not the end. He can see forwards and backwards at the same time better than any other. The thing that is so great about his music is that it both interesting, unique, passionate, and modern, yet very understandable. I think he has composed some of the best music of the last 50 years.

Close, and very difficult not to include were 

-Tchaikovsky - Simply composed some of the most exciting music ever.
-Stravinsky - incredibly creative - so unique, and once again, very intense (I do like the Russian composers as a general rule!)
- Mozart - absolute ballance and perfection
- Debussy - a real rebel, and an aesthetic genius - his musical oeuvre is beauty personified.
- Strayhorn - the "mozart" of the jazz world. Take the A Train and Lush Life are very inspirational to me, and I use them in composition lectures all the time.


----------



## bdelykleon (May 21, 2009)

1. Mozart 
2. Mozart 
3. Haydn
4. Mozart
5. Mozart


----------



## Bach (Jun 2, 2008)

Mozart worse than Haydn?


----------



## bdelykleon (May 21, 2009)

Bach said:


> Mozart worse than Haydn?


Yes, I meant the 15 year-old Mozart of Mitridate


----------

