# In what genre/s a major composer is weakest??



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Consider this:

*
What do you think is the musical genre/s does a major composer considered weakest? And why?*

Those genres that a composer struggle with or those genres that the compositions are less inspired compared to their other output.

For example:

Much I like Brahms' music I consider his *string quartets* his weakest chamber music. They don't have the towering quality of Beethoven's late quartets or Schubert's last four quartets. Same with Schumann..

Schubert's operas are dismal compared to his other works. Much of the music is good but the libretto is *really weak*. Beethoven's only opera is so so, compared to the operas of Mozart's..

What's yours?


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I'd second your conclusion on Brahms. I love his chamber music, but his string quartets fail to impress me.

Haydn's concertos. The cello concertos are decent, the trumpet concerto good, but the rest not particularly. Far below his symphonic and string quartet output. All IMO of course.


----------



## Rasa (Apr 23, 2009)

Tut, Haydn Keyboard in D is good.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Tchaikovsky - Solo piano.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Addition:

Liszt' ''faux'' symphonies. His keyboard works and sacred works are magical and terrific, the orchestral works, less than inspired...


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

John Cage's 4'33 and related experiments. These give him a bad name with lots of classical music lovers (also in this forum), whereas he has composed beautiful modern music such as the sonatas and interludes for prepared piano.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I agree on the Tchaikovsky and Liszt - I find Liszt's orchestration particularly bad, even if the musical ideas are good. Chopin pretty much sucked with an orchestra too.

I suppose I could agree on the string quartets of Brahms, though I would consider that a sub-genre of chamber music, so Brahms still reigns supreme in that genre.


----------



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

I suppose it's unfair of me to single out works I haven't actually listened to but I haven't heard many kind words said about much of Schumann's choral output.

Tchaikovsky's piano works? Hmm...granted he did seem to compose a fair amount of inconsequential salon-style works but I've a real soft spot for 'The Seasons' and, to a degree, the Grand Sonata.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

I will also, perhaps controversially, point out Mozart's solo piano works. It's not that they're that bad...I just think it's the weakest point of his oeuvre. I do however think they tend to be overrated. It's like OMG IT'S MOZART, THESE WORKS ARE AMAZING. In reality I think his solo piano output does not come close to Beethoven, Chopin, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms, etc.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Chopin's piano concerti. He couldn't orchestrate if his life depened on it.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Lisztian said:


> I will also, perhaps controversially, point out Mozart's solo piano works. It's not that they're that bad...I just think it's the weakest point of his oeuvre. I do however think they tend to be overrated. It's like OMG IT'S MOZART, THESE WORKS ARE AMAZING. In reality I think his solo piano output does not come close to Beethoven, Chopin, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms, etc.


His piano compositions are intended for the _fortepiano._ If you hear them on that instrument you will see they make much more sense. He understands the characteristics of each register really well.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

I agree. With the exception of a few piano sonatas especially the one with the famous Turkish March theme, I found Mozarts's piano solo output not at his best. 



ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Chopin's piano concerti. He couldn't orchestrate if his life depened on it.


I remember someone who said here in TC that Chopin couldn't orchestrate under a paper bag...


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> I agree. With the exception of a few piano sonatas especially the one with the famous Turkish March theme, I found Mozarts's piano solo output not at his best.


I think that they are very nice to listen to when played on the fortepiano, but I think his greatest pieces are his operas. His weakest in my opinion are his German dances and all that ballroom music he had to write.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> I remember someone who said here in TC that Chopin couldn't orchestrate under a paper bag...


Sounds like my viola teacher. He cannot stand those works. He also cannot stand Francaix's wind quintet stuff.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

Bach and the lack of Romanticism in his keyboard works.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I agree with the assessment of Haydn's concertos (although the cello concerto is quite good). They simply don't rise to anywhere near the level of Mozart's concertos, where Haydn is not far behind Mozart in most genre and sometimes ahead of him (string quartets, piano sonatas). I would also suggest his operas are a bit disappointing again in comparison with Mozart and Gluck... but this may have owed to his having little access to opera and little chance to stage something on the level of his choral works. Actually the last three are not half bad.

I agree concerning Tchaikovsky's solo piano works, but I question the frequently raised issue of Chopin's orchestration. Schumann often faces the same criticism, and yet listening to good performances of either Chopin's piano concertos or Schumann's symphonies leads me to suspect they are far better than many works by composers thought to be far greater in terms of orchestration.

What of Beethoven, Schubert, and Schumann and opera?  And Brahms chickened out completely.:lol:


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

^What is all this lumping in Fidelio with the efforts of Schubert and Schumann? The operas of the latter two are generally considered failures, no? I've never seen Fidelio, but by all accounts it's supposed to be pretty good if not quite up to Mozart's standards, and it made 30-something in the TC Recommended Operas list which isn't shabby. I can understand people thinking opera was B's weakest genre, but the opinions I see of it on here sometimes don't quite line up with what I read elsewhere.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Hmm I really like Mozart's piano sonatas and Brahms String quartets 

I was really unimpressed with Tchaikovsky's string quartets.


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

I don't agree respect to PIT piano. His Grand sonata is IMHO one of the most important Russian before Rachmaninoff; his Dumka is a fantastic piece, and his 18 pieces op.72 are all of them little gems. A really inferior work is his planed but unfinished flute sonata.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

Clearly for Beethoven it would be the Opera genre. Though he made a pretty good attempt with Fidelio, his only opera, it was apparently excruciatingly difficult for him and he was never really confident in the finished product, even referring to it at one point as a "shipwreck". It apparently went through several versions before achieving some success.

Beethoven almost certainly did not enjoy the difficulties posed by writing and producing an opera. In a letter to George FrederichTreitschke (who worked on the libretto) he said, "I assure you, dear Treitschke, that this opera will win me a martyr's crown. You have by your co-operation saved what is best from the shipwreck. For all this I shall be eternally grateful to you."


----------



## TresPicos (Mar 21, 2009)

Lisztian said:


> I will also, perhaps controversially, point out Mozart's solo piano works. It's not that they're that bad...I just think it's the weakest point of his oeuvre. I do however think they tend to be overrated. It's like OMG IT'S MOZART, THESE WORKS ARE AMAZING.


It _is_ a bit strange that his piano sonatas are so much less amazing than his piano concertos.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

TresPicos said:


> It _is_ a bit strange that his piano sonatas are so much less amazing than his piano concertos.


Yes, it is. I believe Mozart was at his most amazing when pitting the voice against the mass, as in operas and piano concertos. For the piano sonatas he was very good, but not superlative as he usually is IMHO.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

TresPicos said:


> It _is_ a bit strange that his piano sonatas are so much less amazing than his piano concertos.


Many of his piano sonatas were written for his students, or were commissioned by amateurs. Some of the sonatas he wrote for himself are still masterpieces: the A minor sonata was the most violent of its time and the autograph has the most notation for dynamics in Mozart's own pen as if he didn't trust people to interpret the piece correctly. There's also the c minor sonata, b-flat major k.333, and F major k.533. I think those are his best sonatas. Outside the sonatas, I think his best solo piano works are the B minor adagio, a minor rondo, C minor fantasies k.475, 396, and the d minor fantasy. The andante in f major for mechanical organ is also nice.


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

Brahms String Quartets are AMAZING!

Brahms didn't write any non-masterful chamber music.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

trazom said:


> Many of his piano sonatas were written for his students, or were commissioned by amateurs. Some of the sonatas he wrote for himself are still masterpieces: the A minor sonata was the most violent of its time and the autograph has the most notation for dynamics in Mozart's own pen as if he didn't trust people to interpret the piece correctly. There's also the c minor sonata, b-flat major k.333, and F major k.533. I think those are his best sonatas. Outside the sonatas, I think his best solo piano works are the B minor adagio, a minor rondo, C minor fantasies k.475, 396, and the d minor fantasy. The andante in f major for mechanical organ is also nice.


Hmm, some of my favorite works; excluded, however, were the rest of the piano sonatas and my favorite work on solo keyboard by Mozart of all, the Fantasy and Fugue in C kv394


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

DavidMahler said:


> Brahms String Quartets are AMAZING!
> 
> Brahms didn't write any non-masterful chamber music.


Totally agree. And he didn't write anything better that his absolutely extraordinary clarinet quintet. IMO one of the top chamber works of all time.


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

Schumann is underrated in Opera. Genoveva is quite good.

Wagner's downfall is his inability to compose in an intimate manner. Not small scale works, just the feeling that music be of private contemplation. I don't hear it. Mahler can use the same size orchestra and make it sound like a personal thought, not Wagner, not anything I've heard.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

What is all this lumping in Fidelio with the efforts of Schubert and Schumann? The operas of the latter two are generally considered failures, no? I've never seen Fidelio, but by all accounts it's supposed to be pretty good if not quite up to Mozart's standards, and it made 30-something in the TC Recommended Operas list which isn't shabby. I can understand people thinking opera was B's weakest genre, but the opinions I see of it on here sometimes don't quite line up with what I read elsewhere.

How many arias do you know from _Fidelio_? How many show up regularly in recitals or on recordings by leading opera singers. It's a nice round number by my count. To be honest, _Fidelio_ doesn't suck, but its ranking on the TC list has more to do with the name Beethoven than it does with the actual appreciation of the opera. Beyond the obvious operatic masterworks one might easily argue that any number of the operatic endeavors of Mozart, Wagner, Strauss, Puccini, Verdi, Bellini, Donizetti, Bellini, Berlioz, Bizet, Lully, Rameau, Rossini, Berg, Handel etc... are far more successful than _Fidelio_. At his finest, Beethoven not only equals most composers but rises above all but the greatest. This is true of his symphonies, piano sonatas, violin sonatas, string quartets, violin concerto, his choral works, and even his lieder. This is not so true of _Fidelio_. Schumann and Schubert's efforts are admittedly even less successful. Schumann's Genoveva fails as a result of a horrible story-line and the composer's lack of mastery of larger theatrical narrative development. Schubert's efforts were largely aborted... left incomplete. but considering his ability at sustaining the longer narrative development through such song cycles as _Winterreise_ as well as the final two symphonies, it is quite likely he would have eventually mastered the opera. For all his failure, the fragments can be absolutely brilliant...






And there is this brilliant bit of "salvage" work:


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Wagner's downfall is his inability to compose in an intimate manner. Not small scale works, just the feeling that music be of private contemplation. I don't hear it. Mahler can use the same size orchestra and make it sound like a personal thought, not Wagner, not anything I've heard.

That's a meaningless criticism. It's like suggesting that the weakness of _Citizen Kane_ is its failure to employ color expressively. Wagner isn't a composer whose efforts are intended to be "intimate" any more than Michelangelo's artistic endeavors are intended to be "intimate". To suggest that something not even attempted amounts to a weakness is ridiculous. In spite of my snide comment on Brahms, in no way would I suggest that his choice never to compose an opera amounts to proof of his weakness as an operatic composer.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> How many arias do you know from _Fidelio_? How many show up regularly in recitals or on recordings by leading opera singers. It's a nice round number by my count. To be honest, _Fidelio_ doesn't suck, but its ranking on the TC list has more to do with the name Beethoven than it does with the actual appreciation of the opera. Beyond the obvious operatic masterworks one might easily argue that any number of the operatic endeavors of Mozart, Wagner, Strauss, Puccini, Verdi, Bellini, Donizetti, Bellini, Berlioz, Bizet, Lully, Rameau, Rossini, Berg, Handel etc... are far more successful than _Fidelio_.


DDD ranks Fidelio in 35th place. Denis Forman ranks it an 'A' in his Good Opera Guide (highest possible being A++ awarded only to the Ring Cycle), which is the same ranking he gives Idomeneo. I mentioned before a quote which described it as one of the finest operas of the first half of the nineteenth century. Another reference book I've read described it as 'the culmination of 18th century realism in opera'. In general the impression I get is that it is a pretty good but flawed work.

I only know Florestan's aria, but that doesn't say much since my knowledge of opera is pretty negligible.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Wagner's one and only symphony didn't impress me that much. Stick to those fantastically epic German music dramas!


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

jalex said:


> DDD ranks Fidelio in 35th place. Denis Forman ranks it an 'A' in his Good Opera Guide which is the same ranking he gives Idomeneo. I mentioned before a quote which described it as one of the finest operas of the first half of the nineteenth century. Another reference book I've read described it as 'the culmination of 18th century realism in opera'. In general the impression I get is that it is a pretty good but flawed work.


That is pretty much the way I see Fidelio - approximately on a par with Mozart's Idomeneo. Both are good, even very good efforts, but far from the mastery Mozart demonstrated with his later greatest operas. And Beethoven apparently had far greater difficulties in composing Fidelio than Mozart had with Idomeneo. And so the judgement still stands - Beethoven's weakness was the Opera genre.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

poconoron said:


> That is pretty much the way I see Fidelio - approximately on a par with Mozart's Idomeneo. Both are good, even very good efforts, but far from the mastery Mozart demonstrated with his later greatest operas. And Beethoven apparently had far greater difficulties in composing Fidelio than Mozart had with Idomeneo. And so the judgement still stands - Beethoven's weakness was the Opera genre.


Idomeneo is considered Mozart's first mature opera and has some of his most powerful and experimental orchestra and choral writing. It's one of his greatest achievements.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

trazom said:


> Idomeneo is considered Mozart's first mature opera and has some of his most powerful and experimental orchestra and choral writing. It's one of his greatest achievements.


Agreed........... but I think it is generally acknowledged that Mozart reached even greater, more lofty heights with the 3 DaPonte operas and the Magic Flute.


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Wagner's downfall is his inability to compose in an intimate manner. Not small scale works, just the feeling that music be of private contemplation. I don't hear it. Mahler can use the same size orchestra and make it sound like a personal thought, not Wagner, not anything I've heard.
> 
> That's a meaningless criticism. It's like suggesting that the weakness of _Citizen Kane_ is its failure to employ color expressively. Wagner isn't a composer whose efforts are intended to be "intimate" any more than Michelangelo's artistic endeavors are intended to be "intimate". To suggest that something not even attempted amounts to a weakness is ridiculous. In spite of my snide comment on Brahms, in no way would I suggest that his choice never to compose an opera amounts to proof of his weakness as an operatic composer.


Really?

There's plenty of operas with intimate moments, just not Wagner. The guy was expansive and grandiose thru and thru. It's impossible for me to feel close to him or his music, but it's wonderfully written.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

poconoron said:


> Agreed........... but I think it is generally acknowledged that Mozart reached even greater, more lofty heights with the 3 DaPonte operas and the Magic Flute.


They're more popular with audiences because of their libretto, but they're not more advanced musically, which is why I don't personally consider them greater.


----------



## opus55 (Nov 9, 2010)

kv466 said:


> Bach and the lack of Romanticism in his keyboard works.


:lol:

I love Brahms' chamber music but must agree that his string quartets are weak.

Other examples in *my* opinion -

Beethoven - cello sonatas sound weak compared to his other monumental works in chamber music
Faure - love his requiem and chamber works however somewhat disappointed by his solo piano music


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

opus55 said:


> Beethoven - cello sonatas sound weak compared to his other monumental works in chamber music


The last three are rock solid I think. I haven't heard the first two.


----------



## Terrapin (Apr 15, 2011)

opus55 said:


> :lol:
> 
> I love Brahms' chamber music but must agree that his string quartets are weak.
> 
> Beethoven - cello sonatas sound weak compared to his other monumental works in chamber music


I don't understand the bashing of the Brahms quartets. They are solid entries in his outstanding catalog of chamber works.

The five Beethoven cello sonatas are among the best in the genre. To my ears, the Beethoven Third and the Brahms Second are the two greatest cello sonatas.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Terrapin said:


> I don't understand the bashing of the Brahms quartets. They are solid entries in his outstanding catalog of chamber works.


I suppose, the thinking is, Brahms is the heir of Beethoven and he should produce works that can match on Beethoven, like on the symphony. But the string quartets, *good works as they are, didn't measure to Beethoven's monumental late quartets or Schubert's towering Death and the Maiden.* I consider his string quartets the weakest of his works.

In my opinion, until Shostakovich composed his String Quartet no. 8, no great composer matched Beethoven and Schubert in the string quartet genre.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> I suppose, the thinking is, Brahms is the heir of Beethoven and he should produce works that can match on Beethoven, like on the symphony. But the string quartets, *good works as they are, didn't measure to Beethoven's monumental late quartets or Schubert's towering Death and the Maiden.* I consider his string quartets the weakest of his works.
> 
> In my opinion, until Schoenberg composed his String Quartet no. 8, no great composer matched Beethoven and Schubert in the string quartet genre.


Schoenberg wrote 8 string quartets? News to me.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

Presumably Shostakovich. I think Bartok got there first. Mendelssohn had a couple of good'ns but not really of that standard.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

violadude said:


> Schoenberg wrote 8 string quartets? News to me.


Fixed!

Ha ha ha.. I was listening to Schoenberg when I posted that. It should be Shostakovich.. =)


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Richard Strauss - Chamber (Violin Concerto anyone?)



peeyaj said:


> I suppose, the thinking is, Brahms is the heir of Beethoven and he should produce works that can match on Beethoven, like on the symphony. But the string quartets, *good works as they are, didn't measure to Beethoven's monumental late quartets or Schubert's towering Death and the Maiden.* I consider his string quartets the weakest of his works.
> 
> In my opinion, until Shostakovich composed his String Quartet no. 8, no great composer matched Beethoven and Schubert in the string quartet genre.


Haydn? Schubert's last four string quartets and his string quintet are great, but Haydn's Opus 76 are only behind Beethoven's Late Quartets as containing some of the greatest masterpieces in the genre. The Last Seven Words of Christ, Opus 77 no 1 and 2, Opus 103 no 1, opus 74. Have you listened to the Takacs performance of the opus 76, 77, and 103? Haydn's quartets require a virtuoso effort for them to come alive because his quartets are matched to the instruments, unlike the Grosse Fugue, which survives better in decent performances.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

brianwalker said:


> Richard Strauss - Chamber (Violin Concerto anyone?)
> 
> Haydn? Schubert's last four string quartets and his string quintet are great, but Haydn's Opus 76 are only behind Beethoven's Late Quartets as containing some of the greatest masterpieces in the genre. The Last Seven Words of Christ, Opus 77 no 1 and 2, Opus 103 no 1, opus 74. Have you listened to the Takacs performance of the opus 76, 77, and 103? Haydn's quartets require a virtuoso effort for them to come alive because his quartets are matched to the instruments, unlike the Grosse Fugue, which survives better in decent performances.


Honestly, I'm not really impressed with Haydn's string quartets, though I really admire his ''Emperor'' quartets. The problem with Haydn' quartets, is that they are so many of them, that some may find it tiresome to separate the good from not the good ones. The fact, that I much prefer the early Romantic era is a minus to him.

If I'm going to rank the best string quartet composers, they would be:

Beethoven

Schubert ( though I much prefer quartets than Beethoven)

Dvorak

Mozart

Haydn

Shostakovich

Brahms

Overall, I respect Haydn's innovation to the genre but he wouldn't be my first choice upon listening to a string quartet (Schubert's 15 would have the honor).

PS: TC'S Greatest String Ensembles is a must read.

http://www.talkclassical.com/13221-talk-classical-top-50-a.html


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> Honestly, I'm not really impressed with Haydn's string quartets, though I really admire his ''Emperor'' quartets. The problem with Haydn' quartets, is that they are so many of them, that some may find it tiresome to separate the good from not the good ones. The fact, that I much prefer the early Romantic era is a minus to him.
> 
> If I'm going to rank the best string quartet composers, they would be:
> 
> ...


I know that feeling. I felt the same way about opera, satisfying myself with only the preludes and arias, thinking the rest too difficult to tackle and a waste of time. I changed my mind after listening to Tristan in full.

Get these three recordings and listen to everything thrice; I guarantee that you'll change your mind. If not I will give you a full refund myself.

http://www.amazon.com/Haydn-String-Quartets-Op-Germany/dp/B0002U9G8K
http://www.amazon.com/Haydn-Project-Emerson-String-Quartet/dp/B00005OKSH
http://www.amazon.com/Haydn-String-...=sr_1_4?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1324786249&sr=1-4

To see Haydn ranked below Dvorak (!) is madness.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Taneyev is one of the best string quartet composers!


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

@brianwalker

In my first post, I was referring to the string quartets of Romantic era. So that would only include Beethoven to Shostakovich.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

I agree with Brian, Haydn's Op. 76 are incredible and Op. 76 No. 6 is for me one of the biggest omissions from that list (also Beethoven #12, Janacek #1, Mendelssohn #2, a few of Shostakovich's. And ALL of Bartok's missing ones, they are a ridiculous omission). Haydn's Op. 77 pair wouldn't have been out of place on it either. Some of the inclusions which knocked out the ones I mentioned are strange: Grieg, Bruckner Quintet (at 25!), Bruch, Sibelius, Elgar, Enescu, Dvorak Sextet, Schmidt are all decent but really? Even Tchaikovsky's SQ was presumably included mostly for the slow movement...there are lots of missing ones with four high quality movements.

Edit: Schubert second best writer of string quartets? I doubt it. The first class guys are Haydn, Beethoven, Bartok, maybe Shostakovich who all composed lots of first rate quartets. Schubert sits just behind these with 3 top quality ones. 

On topic: Niels Gade. First symphony pretty good, downhill from there.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> Fixed!
> 
> Ha ha ha.. I was listening to Schoenberg when I posted that. It should be Shostakovich.. =)


Oh really? You don't think Shostakovich's 3rd or 5th string quartets deserve to be in the pantheon of great string quartets?


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

violadude said:


> Oh really? You don't think Shostakovich's 3rd or 5th string quartets deserve to be in the pantheon of great string quartets?


Honestly, violadude, I'm only starting to dip into Shostakovich chamber works. I mainly listen to his symphonies, and only listened to his String Quartet no. 8, when I read the TC top string ensembles.

But you have mentioned his 3 and 5, and I'll gladly give them a try. Thanks!  Do you have any recommended recordings?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> Honestly, violadude, I'm only starting to dip into Shostakovich chamber works. I mainly listen to his symphonies, and only listened to his String Quartet no. 8, when I read the TC top string ensembles.
> 
> But you have mentioned his 3 and 5, and I'll gladly give them a try. Thanks!  Do you have any recommended recordings?


Oh ok 

Hmm I'm not big on recordings. I own the Emerson quartet recording but I'm sure there are others that are just as good.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> Honestly, I'm not really impressed with Haydn's string quartets, though I really admire his ''Emperor'' quartets. The problem with Haydn' quartets, is that they are so many of them, that some may find it tiresome to separate the good from not the good ones. The fact, that I much prefer the early Romantic era is a minus to him.
> 
> If I'm going to rank the best string quartet composers, they would be:
> 
> ...


Ahem... What about Peter Sculthorpe who has written 17 (I think) of magnificent string quartets in the world?


----------



## Webernite (Sep 4, 2010)

The problem with the Brahms string quartets is that they don't really sound like Brahms. And they're terribly played most of the time, especially the one in C minor. But I still like them. No other string quartets are as symphonic as Brahms's Op. 51.


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

Webernite said:


> The problem with the Brahms string quartets is that they don't really sound like Brahms. And they're terribly played most of the time, especially the one in C minor. But I still like them. No other string quartets are as symphonic as Brahms's Op. 51.


If you have heard only terrible recordings of Brahm's SQ Nº3, try the ones from the Lener, the old Budapest and the Prague SQ, and maybe you'll find that they aren't "terrible".


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Webernite said:


> The problem with the Brahms string quartets is that they don't really sound like Brahms. And they're terribly played most of the time, especially the one in C minor. But I still like them. No other string quartets are as symphonic as Brahms's Op. 51.


Have you heard the Tokyo quartet playing them?


----------



## Webernite (Sep 4, 2010)

Yeah. That's one of the better recordings.


----------



## Webernite (Sep 4, 2010)

Odnoposoff said:


> If you have heard only terrible recordings of Brahm's SQ Nº3, try the ones from the Lener, the old Budapest and the Prague SQ, and maybe you'll find that they aren't "terrible".


I don't own any of these. So yes, you may well be right.


----------



## pluhagr (Jan 2, 2012)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Wagner's downfall is his inability to compose in an intimate manner. Not small scale works, just the feeling that music be of private contemplation. I don't hear it. Mahler can use the same size orchestra and make it sound like a personal thought, not Wagner, not anything I've heard.
> 
> That's a meaningless criticism. It's like suggesting that the weakness of _Citizen Kane_ is its failure to employ color expressively. Wagner isn't a composer whose efforts are intended to be "intimate" any more than Michelangelo's artistic endeavors are intended to be "intimate". To suggest that something not even attempted amounts to a weakness is ridiculous. In spite of my snide comment on Brahms, in no way would I suggest that his choice never to compose an opera amounts to proof of his weakness as an operatic composer.


I have to disagree. I think that Wagner not being intimate enough is a perfectly valid assessment. Wagner was not intimate in his works. I think that they would be better with a feeling of being intimate


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

pluhagr said:


> I have to disagree. I think that Wagner not being intimate enough is a perfectly valid assessment. Wagner was not intimate in his works. I think that they would be better with a feeling of being intimate


But Wagner's _symphony_ is no good.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Tchaikovsky - solo piano music. He was crap at it.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> Addition:
> 
> Liszt' ''faux'' symphonies. His keyboard works and sacred works are magical and terrific, the orchestral works, less than inspired...


I didn't comment on this at first...but I disagree. I think in his tone poems his orchestration is lacking (despite being quite revolutionary and influential there), but in the best of them it's either pretty good or you don't notice because the ideas itself are very good - Tasso, Orpheus, Les Preludes, Heroide Funebre, Hamlet, Mazeppa, Hunnenschlacht, Von der Wiege bis zum Grabe are terrific works, and the orchestration, while inconsistent, is sometimes very good - Liszt was an experimenter after all.

And to say the Faust Symphony is less than inspired is rubbish. I think it's a true masterpiece in every sense of the word - and if you think the orchestration is poor, listen to the last movement. I think the orchestration is brilliant there. The Dante Symphony is a flawed work, but I still think it's terrific. I personally put the Faust in the league with the best of Brahms symphonies, and the Dante with the best of Schumanns, but that is subjective, of course.

But to me?
Tasso, Lamento e Trionfo.
Les Préludes.
Orpheus.
Mazeppa.
Héroïde funèbre.
Hamlet.
Hunnenschlacht.
Von der Wiege bis zum Grabe.
Eine Faust-Symphonie.
Eine Symphonie zu Dante's Divina Commedia.
Deux épisodes d'apres le Faust de Lenau.
Deux légendes.
6 Rapsodies hongroises.
Plus...many works of his that I have not heard.

If you ask me, that's a very good orchestral oeuvre. I would agree that they are his weak point, but not because they are bad, but because the other stuff is so good.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

In Wagner's defence, that symphony was clearly an early work that in no way matches up with the brilliant writing of his major operas. If I recall correctly he intended to start writing more symphonies after he had completed Parsifal, whether this is true or not I don't know, but I do think it's a shame we never got to find out.

Rather than Tchaikovsky, I would say that Schoenberg is incredibly weak when it comes to piano music.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

^Schoenberg was not a great pianist and it shows in his piano works.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Lisztian said:


> Tchaikovsky - Solo piano.


In general, yes, I see why pianists would not like his piano stuff, because I've heard tell that his music is not well written for execution, including the piano concertos. But The Seasons is so beautiful! I would love to learn it one day, if my skill gets better.

I would have to say Sibelius for solo piano instead, he disliked the instrument himself anyway.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> In general, yes, I see why pianists would not like his piano stuff, because I've heard tell that his music is not well written for execution, including the piano concertos. But The Seasons is so beautiful! I would love to learn it one day, if my skill gets better.
> 
> I would have to say Sibelius for solo piano instead, he disliked the instrument himself anyway.


I do agree about the seasons, but to me that is an exception.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Lisztian said:


> I will also, perhaps controversially, point out Mozart's solo piano works. It's not that they're that bad...I just think it's the weakest point of his oeuvre. I do however think they tend to be overrated. It's like OMG IT'S MOZART, THESE WORKS ARE AMAZING. In reality I think his solo piano output does not come close to Beethoven, Chopin, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms, etc.


I tend to agree with you about *Mozart*. I feel the "*Big 3*" or the three *B*'s *Bach*, *Beethoven* and (*B*)*Mozart* tend to have an aura if infallibility around them, To such an extenet it's almost blasphemous to mention it. Agreed the works are not bad just not as good but they get the gold stamp based on the better works.

I don't tend to listen to the *Big Three* a lot or even as much as I used to. Looking around me not many *Talk Classicalists* do perhaps we just revel in "obscurity". ::lol:


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I would have to say Sibelius for solo piano instead, he disliked the instrument himself anyway.


Off you go...get this.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

peeyaj said:


> I suppose, the thinking is, Brahms is the heir of Beethoven and he should produce works that can match on Beethoven, like on the symphony. But the string quartets, *good works as they are, didn't measure to Beethoven's monumental late quartets or Schubert's towering Death and the Maiden.* I consider his string quartets the weakest of his works.
> 
> In my opinion, until Shostakovich composed his String Quartet no. 8, no great composer matched Beethoven and Schubert in the string quartet genre.


have you heard of Dvorak and Draeseke?


----------



## Rondo (Jul 11, 2007)

Shostakovich's ballets. They're sometimes fun to hear but easily forgettable, they don't measure up to those of Prokofiev and Stravinsky.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Mahler - Symphonies


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

Couchie said:


> Mahler - Symphonies


Chopin, solo piano music.


----------



## pluhagr (Jan 2, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> But Wagner's _symphony_ is no good.


I know, I am talking about his operas.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

ScipioAfricanus said:


> have you heard of Dvorak and Draeseke?


You are absolutely correct re: Dvorak, but no I've never heard of Draeseke, tell me more.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

pluhagr said:


> I know, I am talking about his operas.


I agree. Wagner's operas pale in comparison to his later _music dramas._


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

jalex said:


> ^What is all this lumping in Fidelio with the efforts of Schubert and Schumann? The operas of the latter two are generally considered failures, no? I've never seen Fidelio, but by all accounts it's supposed to be pretty good if not quite up to Mozart's standards, and it made 30-something in the TC Recommended Operas list which isn't shabby. I can understand people thinking opera was B's weakest genre, but the opinions I see of it on here sometimes don't quite line up with what I read elsewhere.


You are right and I think people here have been pretty hard on Beethoven. "Fidelio" is often performed and recorded and it can only be regarded as a success. I wonder how many of the people on this post have been to a performance or listened to the whole thing ? This was his first attempt at an opera---have you heard some other composers' first efforts ?Wagner: "Die Feen" or "Des Liebesverbot", Verdi's "Oberto" or "Un Giorno Di Regno" ? But in any case I find it noble and quite gripping. As for memorable numbers regularly performed and recorded, I would remind you of the followig :The duet- "O Namenlose Freude", The Quartet-a miracle of musical beauty, Pizarro's-"Ha, Welch Ein Augenblick", Marzelline's aria, Leonore's "Abscheulicher", one of the great testpices of the dramatic soprano's repertory,Florestan's aria-"Gott,Welch Dunkel Hier" and of course THE Prisoners' Chorus.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

^I was just flicking through a copy of the Penguin Guide to Opera in my school library today, and there was a quote about Fidelio-bashing to the effect of 'it seems as if some people feel the need to free themselves from the burden of Beethoven's greatness by finding an area of composition in which they can criticise or even patronise him, but the truth is...' etc. Very apt.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

Crudblud said:


> Rather than Tchaikovsky, I would say that Schoenberg is incredibly weak when it comes to piano music.


What? His tiny piano output is of very high quality.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

It is a testament to the greatness of Beethoven that the opera genre is considered his weakness, IMO. I love Beethoven beyond all other composers (except for Mozart), but I have to admit that if he had a weakness, opera was it. He had a terrible time composing it and once referred to it as a "shipwreck". And he never again returned to the genre.

So if we are honest, that was his weakness even if Fidelio is considered a fairly good opera.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Paganini- anything that didn't involve a solo violin.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

moody said:


> You are right and I think people here have been pretty hard on Beethoven. "Fidelio" is often performed and recorded and it can only be regarded as a success. I wonder how many of the people on this post have been to a performance or listened to the whole thing ? This was his first attempt at an opera---have you heard some other composers' first efforts ?Wagner: "Die Feen" or "Des Liebesverbot", Verdi's "Oberto" or "Un Giorno Di Regno" ? But in any case I find it noble and quite gripping. As for memorable numbers regularly performed and recorded, I would remind you of the followig :The duet- "O Namenlose Freude", The Quartet-a miracle of musical beauty, Pizarro's-"Ha, Welch Ein Augenblick", Marzelline's aria, Leonore's "Abscheulicher", one of the great testpices of the dramatic soprano's repertory,Florestan's aria-"Gott,Welch Dunkel Hier" and of course THE Prisoners' Chorus.


Fidelio came in at 33 out of 272 in our list of most recommended operas. I suggest anyone who wishes to see why listens to this:












> one of the great testpices of the dramatic soprano's repertory,Florestan's aria-"Gott,Welch Dunkel Hier"


Actually Florestan is a tenor, and in this recording Kaufmann gives a truly splendid rendition of this aria.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

violadude said:


> Paganini- anything that didn't involve a solo violin.


What about his solo guitar music? That stuff is pretty good!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

mamascarlatti said:


> Fidelio came in at 33 out of 272 in our list of most recommended operas. I suggest anyone who wishes to see why listens to this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think you misread my post or it's probably just my lousy punctuation. I was referring to "Abscheulicher" as being one of the biggest tests for sopranos. I know quite well that "Gott welch dunkel hier" ( God what darkness here ) is Florestan's aria while languishing in gaol. I've got 21 versions of it and the best I think was Helge Roswaenge closely followed by Julius Patzak.The best renditions of "Abscheulicher" are probably those by Flagstad and Lotte Lehmann.


----------



## Sofronitsky (Jun 12, 2011)

Brahms - Piano Music


----------



## Sofronitsky (Jun 12, 2011)

Also if, he can be considered a major composer... Franck - Piano Concertos (They're awful!)


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Sofronitsky said:


> Also if, he can be considered a major composer... Franck - Piano Concertos (They're awful!)


Franck wrote no piano concertos did he? He did write his symphonic variations which are excellent.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Sofronitsky said:


> Brahms - Piano Music


Go on with you, you're just joking aren't you, aren't you??


----------



## Sofronitsky (Jun 12, 2011)

moody said:


> Franck wrote no piano concertos did he? He did write his symphonic variations which are excellent.


It's not a surprise you haven't heard of them.. Please do not try and sate your curiosity by finding a recording on Youtube. It will only serve to diminish your opinion of Franck.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Sofronitsky said:


> It's not a surprise you haven't heard of them.. Please do not try and sate your curiosity by finding a recording on Youtube. It will only serve to diminish your opinion of Franck.


I see that Franck wrote a piano concerto listed as No,2 in 1835 , as he was born in 1822 that would make him 14 years old. I suppose this would explain why I have never heard of it and you would think it was awful. In fact , according to one source, he apparently wrote two conceri before he was twelve---now that does sound awful!
OK so you win a dolly for that one , but I see you give no answer re: saying that Brahms' piano music shows him at his weakest, I can't wait to hear from you--- also you may well be in danger from Polednice.


----------



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

In Cesar Franck's case the feeling seems to be that (apart from the Six Pieces for organ and the Panis angelicus section of an early mass) ALL of his output composed prior to c.1870 can be dismissed as weak and lacking individuality and that, as if someone flicked a switch, the complete opposite is true after that.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Sofronitsky said:


> Brahms - Piano Music


His piano sonatas are less than inspired. He's trying to write for orchestra when he is composing for solo piano. It all sounds muddy to me.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Tchaikovsky - Piano music


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Never mind, I've just found too much 'irritating' of late, earlier today due to a blog or Zine list of the 10 greatest piano concertos which somebody sent to my for my opinion. My opinion? The list was Ridiculous


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> Consider this:
> 
> *
> What do you think is the musical genre/s does a major composer considered weakest? And why?*
> ...


"Fidelio" is fairly "towering" have you listened to it or have you read this cliched remark somewhere?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

moody said:


> "Fidelio" is fairly "towering" have you listened to it or have you read this cliched remark somewhere?


This is an old thread and I've answered it before---how confusing!!


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

moody said:


> "Fidelio" is fairly "towering" have you listened to it or have you read this cliched remark somewhere?


Do you really believe that Fidelio is equal with these:

*Le nozze di Figaro
Don Giovanni
Così fan tutte
Die Zauberflöte*

??

Compared to Beethoven's other oeuvre, Fidelio is weak. And it can't compare to the best operas of Mozart.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> Do you really believe that Fidelio is equal with these:
> 
> *Le nozze di Figaro
> Don Giovanni
> ...


I've noticed that Beethoven fanboys have a hard time admitting that Beethoven had even the slightest weakness as a composer. Beethoven himself admitted this weakness while composing Fidelio. Opera was _very difficult_ for him.

We should all take note that this thread concerns what a composer was weakest in............ not necessarily that he was poor at it.
I've already weighed in on Fidelio being a fine opera........... but to even compare it to Mozart's towering giants is not being serious.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

F


peeyaj said:


> Do you really believe that Fidelio is equal with these:
> 
> *Le nozze di Figaro
> Don Giovanni
> ...


Die Zauberflöte is a silly opera and doesn't compare to his Da Ponte operas.


----------



## Romantic Geek (Dec 25, 2009)

For me:

Mozart: Chamber works other than String Quartets
Haydn: Concertos
Beethoven: Opera/Lieder (before you go crazy...I find that most musicians can't name a single aria or lied by Beethoven)
Schubert: Opera
Schumann: Symphonic works (god, I just hate them! They're so...dull)
Brahms: Cello Sonatas (these are just awful...and I'm a HUGE fan of Brahms)
Chopin: Anything that involved any other instrument than the piano (including the piano concertos)


Adding another name to the list:

Copland: Opera


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

Romantic Geek said:


> For me:
> 
> Mozart: Chamber works other than String Quartets


I would disagree on that one........... his quintets are magnificent as well as the K563 trio among others. His weakest genre I would say are his piano sonatas which are a bit "lightweight" for the most part, with a few exceptions, as compared to everything else.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

poconoron said:


> I would disagree on that one........... his quintets are magnificent as well as the K563 trio among others. His weakest genre I would say are his piano sonatas which are a bit "lightweight" for the most part, with a few exceptions, as compared to everything else.


His piano sonatas work a lot better on the fortepiano. They make a _lot_ more sense performed on that instrument.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

Romantic Geek said:


> For me:
> 
> *Mozart: Chamber works other than String Quartets*
> Haydn: Concertos
> ...


Why? His quintets are considered to be some of his greatest accomplishments: the g minor and c major string quintets, quintet for piano and winds, for clarinet. What about the divertimento trio k.563, kegelstatt trio, and his piano quartets? Jebus!


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> F
> 
> Die Zauberflöte is a silly opera and doesn't compare to his Da Ponte operas.


It has some of his most advanced ensemble writing and greater range orchestral texture than his other operas. It ranks in every way with the da Ponte operas no matter what people think of its plot.


----------



## Webernite (Sep 4, 2010)

I'd agree that musically the Magic Flute can hold its own against the other operas, but you can't just ignore the plot.


----------



## Romantic Geek (Dec 25, 2009)

trazom said:


> Why? His quintets are considered to be some of his greatest accomplishments: the g minor and c major string quintets, quintet for piano and winds, for clarinet. What about the divertimento trio k.563, kegelstatt trio, and his piano quartets? Jebus!


That's the way I feel when you say his piano sonatas are weak. They're wonderful compositions!


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

Romantic Geek said:


> That's the way I feel when you say his piano sonatas are weak. They're wonderful compositions!


I never said his piano sonatas were weak, at least, I don't remember saying that. I like most of them and I think a couple are extraordinary, but his quintets are really some of his greatest compositions.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Peeyaj's ortiginal thread asked about major composers' weakest genres. He then interjected the opinion that Beethoven's "Fidelio" was only "so-so", that is pre-empting the members' answers not really be said by the person asking the question.
This was in December and Jalex who thinks before uttering ( take note please others of his age group) pointed out that that it got an "A" rating in the good opera guide. Which ,with respect, is more imposing than TC's list which apparently only needs two people to guarantee a work's entry into the list. 
I posted and pointed out that that this was his first attempt and asked Peeyaj if he'd heard other composers' first attempts, such as Wagner's "Die Feen" or "Lieber Verbot", Or Verdi's "Oberto"? I also gave a list of well known arias.etc. from "Fidelio"---I got no reply whatever.
Jalex came back again with Penguin's opera guide's take on the matter-- no response.
It seems to me that the point is being missed here, there's nothing wrong with a member saying that he/she thinks that opera is Beethoven's weak side. But jumping in and saying that it is only "so-so" is simply not true.
POCOMORON.
You appear to have posted the same post several times,but see above. Also, if you are including me as a Beethoven fanboy (whatever?)---be kind enough not to. As for you saying that it does not compare with Mozart's best that is not being serious---and in my opinion completely out of line! Mind you, if you are correct I am a fanboy of Mozart, Brahms, Mahler,Liszt,Schubert, Schumann,Verdi, Loewe, Wolf, Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff, Soler, Scarlatti, etc.etc.I mean where do I turn to avoid being a fanboy, Burtwhistle,
In my opinion Beethven's weakest spot was lieder and not opera at all.
"Fidelio" should not be compare with the Mozart works, it is in a different form completely and it is serious stuff with a message as they say.His chosen form is close to singspiel and a conductor who can demonstrate the greatness of Beethoven's magical musical and dramatic thought ,and not falsify the singspiel form and occasionally style in which much of it is cast ,is the one who would come nearest to a complete realisation.
Let us look at informed opinions: Victor Gollancz the well known publisher who was vastly experience in opera throughout Europe and seemingly on good terms with all the great and good .
" It is a work to be accepted as supreme, and that is the end of it: others abide our question, Beethoven is free....and it reveals with final genius what to my ordinary human thinking is the ultimate meaning of life , namely that our life "here below" is not so much the value of soul-making that Keats imagined it to be --but what may come to the same thing--an opportunity for co-operation between God and man.This was an idea that we know from other sources was precious to Beethoven".
Over the top? No, it means he's seen the opera and it tends to have that sort of effect on people who actually have seen it!
Beethoven had been looking for a libretto for a long time but none appealed to him until he was offered the text of "Fidelio ,this did arouse a response for its revolutionary theme and high ethical values corresponding to his own.

William Mann, the eminent music critic: "We come to understand what Beethoven meant when he said in his will: 'before all others I hold it worthy of being possessed and used for the science of art'.
Romain Roland said: '...through "Fidelio" Beethoven made himself the Aeschylus of the French Revolution".
Critics and failed composers are never tired of declaring that "Fidelio" is only a great opera because Beethoven was the name of the composer.The greatness ,the undiminishable impact of "Fidelio" are indeed Beethoven's work. The point about "Fidelio" was that all over the world (as now) injustice was being perpertrated and it could be prevented by the convinced ,individual action of anybody on earth who sufficiently believed in human moralities, and above all the sanctity of human life. This was Beethoven' credo and he affirmed it with his might in "Fidelio".

So we are talking of a more than "so-so" piece of work which puts quite bluntly an important , very relevent message out to the audience.This masterpiece should not be compared with Mozart operas, this just highlights the fatuous nonsense behind most polls and lists.
I have a feeling that certain members crouch in their rooms thinking of yet another poll - what can we do this time?
In fact it is obvious that they do and with no preparation on their part whatsoever.


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

Let's not go crazy here. From what I've heard of it, Fidelio is a pretty poor piece of music, but come on, it's not even in the same league of naffness as a Mozart opera.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Romantic Geek said:


> For me:
> 
> Mozart: Chamber works other than String Quartets
> Haydn: Concertos
> ...


Do you just come out with this stuff to cause upheavels?The pieces from "Fidelio" that are "standards" are the duet "O Namenlose Freude". "Ha, Welch Ein Augenblick"--Pizarro's aria. Leonore's "Abscheulicher", Florestan's "Gott, Welch Dunkel Hier" and the Prisoners Chorus. These can all be heard on any popular classical radio programmes such as classic FM in the UK.
Any musicians of the type you mention are a complete disgrace.
As for lieder, all the well known lieder singers have recorded most if not all of Beethoven's songs.
e.g. The cycle "An die Ferne Geliebte"," Songs: "An die Hoffnung","Ich Liebe Dich","In Questa Tomba Oscura","Kennst Du Das Land","Neues Liebe, Neues Leben", and there are many more.


----------



## Romantic Geek (Dec 25, 2009)

moody said:


> Do you just come out with this stuff to cause upheavels?The pieces from "Fidelio" that are "standards" are the duet "O Namenlose Freude". "Ha, Welch Ein Augenblick"--Pizarro's aria. Leonore's "Abscheulicher", Florestan's "Gott, Welch Dunkel Hier" and the Prisoners Chorus. These can all be heard on any popular classical radio programmes such as classic FM in the UK.
> Any musicians of the type you mention are a complete disgrace.
> As for lieder, all the well known lieder singers have recorded most if not all of Beethoven's songs.
> e.g. The cycle "An die Ferne Geliebte"," Songs: "An die Hoffnung","Ich Liebe Dich","In Questa Tomba Oscura","Kennst Du Das Land","Neues Liebe, Neues Leben", and there are many more.


I go to a top conservatory in the world. I asked 10 people (all graduate students) if they could name me 1 aria in Fidelio. Only 1 person could. Maybe a difference of worlds, but that's the reality I live in.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Argus said:


> Let's not go crazy here. From what I've heard of it, Fidelio is a pretty poor piece of music, but come on, it's not even in the same league of naffness as a Mozart opera.


Did you say from what I've heard or when I heard it--there's a difference you know and hearsay evidence is not usually allowed.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

To the moody one,

I say, old chap, you are one unpleasant, cantankerous old codger. I've seen enough of your posts to make that highly informed decision. Tally ho, Mr. Curmudgeon.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

poconoron said:


> To the moody one,
> 
> I say, old chap, you are one unpleasant, cantankerous old codger. I've seen enough of your posts to make that highly informed decision. Tally ho, Mr. Curmudgeon.


I promise you that I will hold your opinion close to my heart. It might have been better for you to have given an answer to one ot two of them.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

moody said:


> As for you saying that it does not compare with Mozart's best that is not being serious---and in my opinion completely out of line!


Mr. moody curmudgeon..........you can't have it both ways.......you are contradicting yourself over on the other thread "Poll:Fidelio vs. Mozart operas" where you said, and I quote: "I made it quite plain that this opera should not be compared with the Mozart operas."

Get your story straight.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

trazom said:


> I never said his piano sonatas were weak, at least, I don't remember saying that. I like most of them and I think a couple are extraordinary, but his quintets are really some of his greatest compositions.


 Correct. Anyone who thinks that Mozart's chamber works outside his string quartets are generally weak can't have listened to any of them. For starters, several of the Quintets are highly regarded, most obviously the Clarinet Quintet. I do honestly believe that a lot of the comment on this forum is so badly misinformed. I'm often dumb-founded at it.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

poconoron said:


> Mr. moody curmudgeon..........you can't have it both ways.......you are contradicting yourself over on the other thread "Poll:Fidelio vs. Mozart operas" where you said, and I quote: "I made it quite plain that this opera should not be compared with the Mozart operas."
> 
> Get your story straight.


You have already called me unpleasant moody and curmudgeonly and an old codger, This ,to say the least, is very rude and disrespectful and against the TC rules that you agreed. Incidentally you have never seen me resort to any thing similar.You have partially repeated it and I object--do you understand that? I suggest we take this no further because if you do I will come back at you and then the powers that be will jump in as we have only recently been warned.
As for your last post, you are wrong I was pointing out that the other person was talking about it not comparing and I didn't agree--look before you leap!
I will not discuss this any further with you, particularly as you,ve brought nothing into the discussion apart from ,funnily enough unpleasantness.


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

moody said:


> You have already called me unpleasant moody and curmudgeonly and an old codger, This ,to say the least, is very rude and disrespectful and against the TC rules that you agreed. Incidentally you have never seen me resort to any thing similar.You have partially repeated it and I object--do you understand that? I suggest we take this no further because if you do I will come back at you and then the powers that be will jump in as we have only recently been warned.
> As for your last post, you are wrong I was pointing out that the other person was talking about it not comparing and I didn't agree--look before you leap!
> I will not discuss this any further with you, particularly as you,ve brought nothing into the discussion apart from ,funnily enough unpleasantness.


May I respectfully point out that *you* started the unpleasantness by name-calling as follows: POCOMORON in post 107 above..

Get the facts straight. It is not worth another second of my time in dealing with you, old chap.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

poconoron said:


> May I respectfully point out that *you* started the unpleasantness by name-calling as follows: POCOMORON in post 107 above..
> 
> Get the facts straight. It is not worth another second of my time in dealing with you, old chap.


I note you remarks and would absolutely promise you that the Pocomoron thing was an absolute slip up. I almost wish it wasn't but of course the two letters are adjacent. If you had commented I would have put it right and I apologise for appearing to be rude. As you have been happy to point out I am old and my generation were taught to take responsibility for mistakes, also in the case of the "Fidelio" nonsense there is no need to resort to insulting anyone on my part.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

^How old are you?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> ^How old are you?


74 I'm afraid.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

moody said:


> 74 I'm afraid.


Oh don't worry you still have a way to go.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Oh don't worry you still have a way to go.


Well.I'm certainly very relieved to hear that---thanks for the vote of confidence!


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

Pacomoron :lol: Oh, that killed me. I'll give moody the benefit of the doubt, because those two letters are quite close to each other.


----------

