# an utterly random poll



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

The question is, which of these in your opinion is most important as a part of music history? I.e. which is the most "historically important?" Which is the most basic to a person's knowledge of music history?

Edit: I apologize for the arbitrariness of the selection, my reason is worse than the randomness itself. 

Edit more: Note that it's a public poll! I might ask about your reasons!


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Banana ''''''''''


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Instinctively I'd say Robert Johnson but I'll cogitate on it and get back to you


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

I clicked on Stravinsky before I read the question properly and noticed you were talking about a specific recording, one I've never listened to. So now I feel silly.


----------



## shangoyal (Sep 22, 2013)

The Brandenburgs come out on top!


----------



## Stavrogin (Apr 20, 2014)

Yeah the inclusion of specific recordings is a bit puzzling, and leads me to remove all classical works from my possible choices.

Goodman - nah, sure it's one of the peak albums of swing, but as for historical importance I wouldn't rate him that high.
Brubeck - nah, cool jazz is one of the least significant evolutions of jazz (imo of course)
Jarrett - has a case, definitely a cornerstone of jazz in general and impro/avant jazz in particuar
Hancock - jazz funk ranks below cool jazz in my historical ratings
Johnson - has a case, would blues and then rock and then whatever came be the same without RJ? I don't know
Coleman - I may be wrong but I think Cecil Taylor's work was more pioneristic than Coleman's for the birth of free jazz
Ellington - an important album in Ellington's career but even without it the importance of Ellington wouldn't have been so remarkably deminished imo
Getz - uhm, no (utterly random explanation, I know)

So it's either Johnson or Jarrett, I vote Johnson.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Winterreisender said:


> I clicked on Stravinsky before I read the question properly and noticed you were talking about a specific recording, one I've never listened to. So now I feel silly.


That's ok, my bad! I should've made that clearer.

Which might you have voted for if I'd made that clearer?


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

Applying the question solipsistically, which is the only fitting and decent way to interpret historical importance, I would have to say Getz/Gilberto as it is a work of unquantifiable significance to me.

Other than that I would say Robert Johnson. I would think there are quite a few other landmark jazz albums that have a turning point quality to them but less so for classical recordings. Joshua Rifkin's early HIP recording of the Mass in B minor seems like it might be more significant than Klemperer's even if not as well known. Maybe something by Alfred Deller or Wanda Landowska or that Enrico Caruso 78 everyone had back in the day might have a better case for historical landmark than any of the other classical on that list. I suppose Britten's _War Requiem_ is significant as a modern work that was well received and entered the public consciousness quickly, the Philip Glass album _Glassworks_ has a similar influence.


----------



## Jonathan Wrachford (Feb 8, 2014)

I voted for Bach, the Brandenburg Concertos, because that is such an important composition


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

science said:


> Which might you have voted for if I'd made that clearer?


Well I don't think there are many classical recordings that have caused a seismic revolution in music history. I mean, would we really miss Klempeper's Mass in B Minor, given how many other recordings of this work exist?

But then again, none of the non-classical artists you have mentioned are ones I listen to either. So I will have to vote Britten, as that was the first recording of the War Requiem and, arguably, you can't beat the composer's intention.

Although I'm still not sure why I'm really contemplating this question.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Winterreisender said:


> Although I'm still not sure why I'm really contemplating this question.


Well, the explanation is worse than the poll itself.

Thank you for your answer!


----------

