# Wagner Vs. Others



## Gustavbf (Oct 13, 2011)

Hi All:

this is my first post and I am happy to discuss my issue. I started listening opera when I was 8, Verdi and Puccini. I quickly fell in love with Puccini and bell canto. Now, at my 50's I am totally fanatic of Wagner, Strauss, Puccini, Bizet, Leoncavallo, Mascagni, etc, but I can't stand Mozart, just very little Verdi (Otello)...and that', it. I wonder if anyone had same experience in Opera.


----------



## samurai (Apr 22, 2011)

Gustavbf said:


> Hi All:
> 
> this is my first post and I am happy to discuss my issue. I started listening opera when I was 8, Verdi and Puccini. I quickly fell in love with Puccini and bell canto. Now, at my 50's I am totally fanatic of Wagner, Strauss, Puccini, Bizet, Leoncavallo, Mascagni, etc, but I can't stand Mozart, just very little Verdi (Otello)...and that', it. I wonder if anyone had same experience in Opera.


Why don't you try the thread offered by this great Forum which is *specifically* *devoted* to *opera*, then?


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

Indeed, I believe it's located here.


----------



## jdavid (Oct 4, 2011)

Great enthusiasm! I particularly admire Strauss and Puccini, Leoncavallo and Mascagni, and the Verdi 'Otello' is a masterpiece, but I also love Mozart - La Nozze di Figaro, and Don Giovanni, particularly. Those two operas are Italian operas... just 18th century ones by an Austrian!


----------



## alban (Mar 6, 2012)

*well *

mozart is for realised spirits, bethoven for academics, pucini for artists, verdi for weekend, wagner for mentals, strauss for oscar price, shopen for kung fu, bach for monks and budhists, ..... Liszt for hackers


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

alban said:


> mozart is for realised spirits, bethoven for academics, pucini for artists, verdi for weekend, wagner for mentals, strauss for oscar price, shopen for kung fu, bach for monks and budhists, ..... Liszt for hackers


Then tell me, what's *Ligeti* for?


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Gustavbf said:


> Hi All:
> 
> this is my first post and I am happy to discuss my issue. I started listening opera when I was 8, Verdi and Puccini. I quickly fell in love with Puccini and bell canto. Now, at my 50's I am totally fanatic of Wagner, Strauss, Puccini, Bizet, Leoncavallo, Mascagni, etc, but I can't stand Mozart, just very little Verdi (Otello)...and that', it. I wonder if anyone had same experience in Opera.


Welcome! :tiphat:

I have strong doubts that you may not be as fanatical about Wagner as Couchie is, but it's good to see more memebers fanatical about a particular composer. I am a big fan of *Ligeti.* You heard of a wonderful opera called _Le Grand Macabre?_


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

Gustavbf said:


> Hi All:
> 
> this is my first post and I am happy to discuss my issue. I started listening opera when I was 8, Verdi and Puccini. I quickly fell in love with Puccini and bell canto. Now, at my 50's I am totally fanatic of Wagner, Strauss, Puccini, Bizet, Leoncavallo, Mascagni, etc, but I can't stand Mozart, just very little Verdi (Otello)...and that', it. I wonder if anyone had same experience in Opera.


Though i believe myself being as a what you would called a wagnerian (as a Wagner fan), i hear them all of those with no complexes. I listen Mascagni and Leoncavallo the lesser. I think Verismo, of all operatic genres i know, is the least for me (Puccini isn't a true Verist).

What i always do is never to compare composers. If one, before beginning the opera, has set his mind to compare with with Wagner's, it becomes an inglourious quest. Enjoy them instead for what they and how they, in their field, presented to us based on opera's premises. It is much better. Whether you like it by your own thoughts without the vigorous "castration" power of Wagner, is a judgement by yourself.


----------



## Morgante (Jul 26, 2012)

Mozart is better than Wagner.


----------



## jani (Jun 15, 2012)

" I believe in Mozart, Beethoven and God" RW


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Then tell me, what's Ligeti for?

Do you really want an answer?


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Then tell me, what's Ligeti for?
> 
> Do you really want an answer?


Why do you dislike Ligeti?


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

(Thread moved from "Classical Music Discussion" sub-forum to "Opera" sub-forum.)


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

neoshredder said:


> Why do you dislike Ligeti?


Partly because, at the urging of SOME WHO SHALL REMAIN UN-NAMED, I listened to some of his work


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> (Thread moved from "Classical Music Discussion" sub-forum to "Opera" sub-forum.)


I was wondering about those earlier posts lol


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Couchie approves this thread.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Nice to have you here ! Keep trying with the Mozart operas ! I have very catholic operatic tastes . 
Although I've always been a Wagner freak, this doesn't stop me from admiring the operas of Mozart,Verdi, Gluck,Handel,Rossini,Donizetti, Bellini, Bizet ,Puccini, et al. 
I'm also a huge Richard Strauss fan, not just of his operas, but just about everything he wrote .
Wozzeck and Lulu by Berg are also masterpieces of the first order, as well as Schoenberg's Moses&Aron.
You must try the great Russian and Czech operas by Tchaikovsky, Mussorgsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Prokofiev ,Borodin, Prokofiev and Shostakovich , as well as those of the Czechs Smetana, Dvorak and Janacek .
Are you familiar with for example, Weber's Der Freischutz, Beethoven's Fidelio,
Manon, Werther and Thais of Massenet, Debussy's Pelleas&Melisande, Boito's Mefistofele, Offenbach's Les Contes D'Hoffmann, Benjamin Britten's Peter Grimes and Billy Budd, Smetana's The Bartred Bride, Dvorak's Rusalka, Janacek's Jenufa, katya Kabanova and the Cunning Little Vixen, Yevgeny Onegin and Pique Dame of Tchaikovsky, Musslorgsky's Boris Godunov and Khovanshchina, Prokofiev's War and Peace, The Love For 3 Oranges, Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk District by Shostakovich , Bartok's Bluebeard's Castle ,
Les Troyens by Berlioz, for example? 
All remarkable operas not to be missed . And so many others !


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Gustavbf said:


> Hi All:
> 
> this is my first post and I am happy to discuss my issue. I started listening opera when I was 8, Verdi and Puccini. I quickly fell in love with Puccini and bell canto. Now, at my 50's I am totally fanatic of Wagner, Strauss, Puccini, Bizet, Leoncavallo, Mascagni, etc, but I can't stand Mozart, just very little Verdi (Otello)...and that', it. I wonder if anyone had same experience in Opera.


You are not uncommon - I know quite a few belcanto (can belto) people who can't stand Mozart. Mozart people like me have that ability to appreciate other styles too and I also love bel canto opera - particularly when Callas is singing it.


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

Every composer has something to offer and we have to identify and concentrate on that. Mozart, in particular, had the unique gift of providing the best possible melodies, which are for the Opera the primordial feature one can ask and look for.
All the others, including Wagner, had to find some other ways (sometimes quite brilliant, like in the case of Wagner) to redeem themselves for less impressive melodies or even the lack of them.

Principe


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Actually Wagner was a more gifted melodist than Mozart.


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

In which way, Couchie? Except for some brilliant ones (and declamatory enough, like the ones in Tannhauser, Loehengrin, Walkure, Siegfried, Parsifal etc.), I cannot see a lot of "gifted" melodies "floating" in every single line of the score, as is the case with Mozart.

Principe


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Then tell me, what's *Ligeti* for?


We'd all like to know.


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

Ligety is for gelity.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

principe said:


> In which way, Couchie? Except for some brilliant ones (and declamatory enough, like the ones in Tannhauser, Loehengrin, Walkure, Siegfried, Parsifal etc.), I cannot see a lot of "gifted" melodies "floating" in every single line of the score, as is the case with Mozart.
> 
> Principe


Melody in Wagner is transformative and weaves a complex story of subtextual dramatic narrative.

Mozart is just song and dance.


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

Your "explanation", Couchie, does not define or much more justify why Wagner is a greater "melodist" than Mozart. It is a good explanation why the former was such a great composer of _Gesamtwerke_, though.

Do you think that the great Finalles in Acts II and IV of "Le nozze" are "song and dance"? And, if we may talk about the composer Mozart, do you think, for instance, that any movement of the String Quintet in g minor or the Piano Quartet in the same key or the Violin Sonata in e minor or the Piano Trio in E major are "Song and Dance" routine?
Whatever may be the answer, these are the perfect "songs and dances", blessed by the most natural way of writing and form.

Principe


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

principe said:


> Do you think that the great Finalles in Acts II and IV of "Le nozze" are "song and dance"?


They're lullabies insofar I'm concerned, I'm always fast asleep before the end of Act II.


----------



## Yashin (Jul 22, 2011)

Opera for me is like cheese. Start with milder types and as i get older i appreciate the ones i used to hate!

I too started with the usual Puccini, Leoncavallo, Mascagni, Verdi and then it spread to Mozart, Berg, Janacek......later Rossini, Donizetti and Bellini. The last few years i have been hooked on Wagner.

Some Verdi operas bore the socks off me as do one or two Mozart operas. Maybe that will change too as i take the time to listen and appreciate more.

Since i largely watch on DVD i guess it is a case of finding a DVD i like...a really good production makes a big difference. I find Cosi fan Tutte a real trial but when i saw a decent production i really enjoyed it after years of finding it boring. 

Now i listen to less Puccini i must say. Verdi i find needs 'time' to sit and watch....i generally don't find it is music to listen to here/there.


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

Yashin said:


> Now i listen to less Puccini i must say. Verdi i find needs 'time' to sit and watch....i generally don't find it is music to listen to here/there.


That's the problem (or isn't) of Verdi's music. His music was strictly for theater. His music wasn't written to be heard in hall concerts or at home (considering that time when there were no recording). His music isn't to be heard like other music. His music is like soundtracks to films.

Of all composers, i rarely listen to Verdi when i'm working. It's too hard because it removes me from what i'm doing to the plot. His music isn't to be beautiful or ugly. His music is just the right music for that specific scene. And that or you pay attention to the opera or it gives you a great headache.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Couchie said:


> Melody in Wagner is transformative and weaves a complex story of subtextual dramatic narrative.
> 
> Mozart is just song and dance.


What Mozart did with melody better than any other composer is define character - who could not recognise despina, the cosi sisters, leporello, papageno - from the character of their melodies in the arias.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

samurai said:


> Why don't you try the thread offered by this great Forum which is *specifically* *devoted* to *opera*, then?


OP didn't come back


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

Yashin said:


> Opera for me is like cheese.


Ah, that's such a great line ... no explanation needed. I had a car like that once.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

guythegreg said:


> Ah, that's such a great line ... no explanation needed. I had a car like that once.


Smelly with holes?


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

sospiro said:


> Smelly with holes?


I love it. :lol:


----------



## Yashin (Jul 22, 2011)

dionisio said:


> That's the problem (or isn't) of Verdi's music. His music was strictly for theater. His music wasn't written to be heard in hall concerts or at home (considering that time when there were no recording). His music isn't to be heard like other music. His music is like soundtracks to films.
> 
> Of all composers, i rarely listen to Verdi when i'm working. It's too hard because it removes me from what i'm doing to the plot. His music isn't to be beautiful or ugly. His music is just the right music for that specific scene. And that or you pay attention to the opera or it gives you a great headache.


Well said! Yes, it is like dipping into/out of shakespeare i guess - it just doesn't work. You need to watch the whole work. I guess Janacek and Berg are the same....story-tellers. And i love them all!

Puccini was brilliant for his 'bleeding chunks' as one book puts it....as was Rossini. Short bursts of less than 10 minutes....my ipod is full of them. Verisimo greats also like Giordano and Leoncavallo.


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

Great Operas are needed to be listened or watched in their entirety, but they are great in every single line of their respective score. You may enjoy a single aria, duet or ensemble from "Le Nozze di Figaro" as well as the whole more than 3 hours entire work.
You see, the issue is not whether the work fits in you, but rather whether you fit in it (how you can reach it).
However, if the discourse has been moved to the comparison with...cheese, I guess the greatness of Wagner (versus others) is a matter of whether one likes _Parmigiano Reggiano_.

Principe


----------



## Bardamu (Dec 12, 2011)

I'd take the Others, thanks.


----------



## WAWilson (Nov 8, 2011)

Couchie said:


> Actually Wagner was a more gifted melodist than Mozart.


This is one of the craziest statements I've ever heard. Mozart was a far greater writer of melody, as by the definition of melody being a single line or musical phrase, mostly the singing. Mozart wrote the world's most gorgeous melodies over a harmonic vocabulary that was much simpler and more straightforward than Wagner. 
Wagner, on the other hand was a far greater harmonic innovator than Mozart (one could argue what Mozart would be capable of if he wrote for himself and not the aristocracy as in the dissonant string quartets). Wagner's melodies, though occasionally stunning on their own, serve to heighten and maintain the incredible harmonic shifts happening below them. It is two completely differently styles of writing. In Mozart the melody is paramount, with the harmony providing accompaniment. In Wagner it is the opposite, the harmony is paramount and the melody highlights it's brilliance (but rarely stands on its own like in Mozart).


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

WAWilson said:


> This is one of the craziest statements I've ever heard. Mozart was a far greater writer of melody, as by the definition of melody being a single line or musical phrase, mostly the singing. Mozart wrote the world's most gorgeous melodies over a harmonic vocabulary that was much simpler and more straightforward than Wagner.
> Wagner, on the other hand was a far greater harmonic innovator than Mozart (one could argue what Mozart would be capable of if he wrote for himself and not the aristocracy as in the dissonant string quartets). Wagner's melodies, though occasionally stunning on their own, serve to heighten and maintain the incredible harmonic shifts happening below them. It is two completely differently styles of writing. In Mozart the melody is paramount, with the harmony providing accompaniment. In Wagner it is the opposite, the harmony is paramount and the melody highlights it's brilliance (but rarely stands on its own like in Mozart).


The fact that Mozart's harmony is lacking is of no consequence to Wagner's ability as a melodist. It goes without saying that Wagner has greater harmony. But harmony is the backbone of melody. Mozart did the best of what he had but with a stunted vocabulary he can't compete with Wagner.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Also: The whole point of Wagner is _endless melody_.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

WAWilson said:


> Mozart wrote the world's most gorgeous melodies over a harmonic vocabulary that was much simpler and more straightforward than Wagner.


No, not in his operas. Mozart's counterpoint was much more skilled than Wagner's. It looks like you're trying to generalize his composition style for his piano sonatas to his operas.


----------



## WAWilson (Nov 8, 2011)

trazom said:


> No, not in his operas. Mozart's counterpoint was much more skilled than Wagner's. It looks like you're trying to generalize his composition style for his piano sonatas to his operas.


I'm not saying anything about his counterpoint, which was incredible. I'm talking just about the harmony itself. The chord progressions. Mozart often sketched out the harmony in blocks, wrote the melody over it, then went back and added the brilliant counterpoint, bringing the harmony to life. The amount of different and beautiful ways Mozart could write the same chord progression was amazing. But the harmonic vocabulary was still simple compared to Wagner. Mozart's operas are by far my favorite, I'm in no way saying this is a sleight on him whatsoever. This is just the way the classical period was.


----------



## WAWilson (Nov 8, 2011)

Couchie said:


> The fact that Mozart's harmony is lacking is of no consequence to Wagner's ability as a melodist. It goes without saying that Wagner has greater harmony. But harmony is the backbone of melody. Mozart did the best of what he had but with a stunted vocabulary he can't compete with Wagner.


While your opinion is obviously not going to change, the average person is not going to agree. Mozart was a far greater melody writer. In Wagner the text is declaimed through melody, in Mozart it is lifted right off the earth into heaven. As much as I love Wagner, Mozart will always be supreme because his music doesn't deal with the ugliness of ordinary life like Wagner. It is only the unattainable beauty of the heavens. Even in pain and suffering it is resilient and uplifting.


----------



## powerbooks (Jun 30, 2012)

Couchie said:


> Also: The whole point of Wagner is _endless melody_.
> 
> Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


No, endless music is NOT equal to endless melody. Most of them are just building the climax, or repeat of the "motifs".

In certain way, someone may argue that probably because of the lack of ability to come up with the whole "melody", someone came out the lazy "motifs", just kidding! 

Yeah, I still love them, even though they are "motifs", not melodies.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

WAWilson said:


> While your opinion is obviously not going to change, the average person is not going to agree. Mozart was a far greater melody writer. In Wagner the text is declaimed through melody, in Mozart it is lifted right off the earth into heaven. As much as I love Wagner, Mozart will always be supreme because his music doesn't deal with the ugliness of ordinary life like Wagner. It is only the unattainable beauty of the heavens. Even in pain and suffering it is resilient and uplifting.


Perfection is of course Mozart's greatest shortcoming.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

powerbooks said:


> No, endless music is NOT equal to endless melody. Most of them are just building the climax, or repeat of the "motifs".
> 
> In certain way, someone may argue that probably because of the lack of ability to come up with the whole "melody", someone came out the lazy "motifs", just kidding!
> 
> Yeah, I still love them, even though they are "motifs", not melodies.


Wrong: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unendliche_Melodie

Mozart is a good melodist, like Andrew LLoyd Webber, John Lennon, and Lady Gaga are good melodists... song and dance, song and dance... You fly back to school now, little powerbooks. _Fly, fly, fly. Fly, fly, fly..._


----------



## Ondine (Aug 24, 2012)

In terms of preference I take 'others' by far. From this 'others' the Idomeneo.

This does not mean that Wagner is behind; he has his great opera works but that does not mean that he has to be 'the best'. 

Why should be that?


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

There is no "best" Ondine. To be _Great_ is already a huge task for a composer. Mozart and Wagner, at least, managed to reach the highest possible level in composing unique masterpieces. Of course, when we have to start with our "preferences" against "others", no wonder Lady Gaga may claim tomorrow she is the _Living_ Mozart!

Principe


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

I like Monteverdi's L'Orfeo. Anything similar to that I should check out?


----------



## Ondine (Aug 24, 2012)

principe said:


> our "preferences" against "others"


Yes, this is not the best step toward music appreciation


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

I borrowed a DVD of Meistersinger. 

Going to tackle it soon.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Ondine said:


> In terms of preference I take 'others' by far.
> ...





Bardamu said:


> I'd take the Others, thanks.


Me too. Either the film with Nicole Kidman called 'The Others' or virtually any opera composer except you-know-who. Or operetta, or musical. & I can say that freely, without any fear of reprisals cos this is not some dictatorship (I hope). Has 'liberation' come?


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

Couchie said:


> Wrong: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unendliche_Melodie
> 
> Mozart is a good melodist, like Andrew LLoyd Webber, John Lennon, and Lady Gaga are good melodists... song and dance, song and dance... You fly back to school now, little powerbooks. _Fly, fly, fly. Fly, fly, fly..._


How is it possible to inclued in the same sentence the name Gaga with Mozart? Or Lennon? It that legal?


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

I don't know if it is "legal", Dionisio, but, definitely, it is..._lethal_!

Principe


----------



## powerbooks (Jun 30, 2012)

Couchie said:


> Wrong: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unendliche_Melodie
> 
> Mozart is a good melodist, like Andrew LLoyd Webber, John Lennon, and Lady Gaga are good melodists... song and dance, song and dance... You fly back to school now, little powerbooks. _Fly, fly, fly. Fly, fly, fly..._


Guess you did not check the reference. Besides Wagner, nobody treat it as melody until you. 

However, most agree there are motifs in Wagner, those infant, not developed melodies.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Couchie said:


> ...
> Mozart is a good melodist, like Andrew LLoyd Webber, John Lennon, and Lady Gaga are good melodists... song and dance, song and dance... You fly back to school now, little powerbooks. _Fly, fly, fly. Fly, fly, fly..._


I thought McCartney was the more typical or 'sweet' melodist in 'The Beatles,' and Lennon less conventional & like the 'rebel' of the band. That's the perception some have. But I don't know what's wrong with melody or dancing?

Anyway, Lloyd Webber was influenced big time by Wagner. A number of his musicals are through written (non stop music, or virtually that) and employ leitmotif type system and also vague or flexible tonality. 'Jesus Christ Superstar' and 'Phantom of the Opera' do it to a very high level for the musical genre, and actually the former is referred to as a 'rock opera.' But the issue is that Lloyd Webber may well be as big a fan of Wagner as you or anyone else here. He doesn't have to be though, as I am not, but I respect Wagner as a great innovator. So I don't see the use of making fun of people who don't like Wagner, doesn't mean we don't give him his due.

& Lloyd Webber was also influenced by others, esp. PUccini (and got too influenced, maybe, he got taken to court for allegedly plagiarising Puccini - but I forget the outcome of that case).


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Sid James said:


> & Lloyd Webber was also influenced by others, esp. PUccini (and got too influenced, maybe, he got taken to court for allegedly plagiarising Puccini - but I forget the outcome of that case).


Oh he plagiarised him all right, stealing an entirely recognisable section of La Fanciulla del West for the most famous song in the Phantom of the Opera.


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

Moira said:


> I borrowed a DVD of Meistersinger.
> 
> Going to tackle it soon.


I think it works better if you put it in a DVD player.


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

dionisio said:


> How is it possible to inclued in the same sentence the name Gaga with Mozart? Or Lennon? It that legal?


I love Lady Gaga. I haven't heard any of her music, but she's great.


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

From your sentence, guythegreg, I presume Lady Gaga is great in anything else than...music (since you haven't heard any of "her" music). 
So, Mozart is not in any "threat" of comparison...thank God!..Wagner too!

Principe


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

principe said:


> From your sentence, guythegreg, I presume Lady Gaga is great in anything else than...music (since you haven't heard any of "her" music).
> So, Mozart is not in any "threat" of comparison...thank God!..Wagner too!
> 
> Principe


Well, her music must be pretty good, or she wouldn't be popular. I think music is a strange porridge of audible drama, athleticism and beauty, and has nothing to do with "depth" or "sophistication", much as some people seem to want it to be. Comparing Lady Gaga to Mozart is no more ridiculous than comparing Beethoven to Wagner. It's just entertainment, whoever is doing it.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

guythegreg said:


> Well, her music must be pretty good, or she wouldn't be popular. I think music is a strange porridge of audible drama, athleticism and beauty, and has nothing to do with "depth" or "sophistication", much as some people seem to want it to be. Comparing Lady Gaga to Mozart is no more ridiculous than comparing Beethoven to Wagner. It's just entertainment, whoever is doing it.


Wow, its amazing how differently people can perceive music. I couldn't disagree more with this post, but at the same time I'm not necessarily sure things like this really have right or wrong answers. But to say that music doesn't have depth or sophistication to me is like saying life doesn't have depth or sophistication. It is there for those who want to perceive it, but in such matters we largely create our own realities based on what we choose to focus on.


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

neoshredder said:


> I like Monteverdi's L'Orfeo. Anything similar to that I should check out?


That is my favorite opera too ! Even though I am not really into this area. Other favorites would be Monteverdi's "*Il ritorno di Ulisse in Patria*" (almost as good as L'Orfeo) and Purcell's "*Dido and Aeneas*". These are my top 3, maybe you will like them either.


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

tdc said:


> Wow, its amazing how differently people can perceive music. I couldn't disagree more with this post, but at the same time I'm not necessarily sure things like this really have right or wrong answers. But to say that music doesn't have depth or sophistication to me is like saying life doesn't have depth or sophistication. It is there for those who want to perceive it, but in such matters we largely create our own realities based on what we choose to focus on.


I think my philosophy is summed up neatly in a Far Side cartoon you may or may not have seen. A couple of apes are relaxing under a tree, and one is saying to the other, "I really love bananas. Sure, I know we all do. But for me, it goes much more deeper than that."


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

Well, I've now listened to a couple of her tunes (Poker Face and Just Dance) and right away I can see a potential problem in bringing this kind of music to the opera hall. It's not undanceable. How would you keep people in their seats?


----------



## Aksel (Dec 3, 2010)

guythegreg said:


> Well, I've now listened to a couple of her tunes (Poker Face and Just Dance) and right away I can see a potential problem in bringing this kind of music to the opera hall. It's not undanceable. How would you keep people in their seats?


Opera not danceable? Puh-leeeaz.


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

So, according to guythegreg, whatever music is popular "must be pretty good". So, Lady Gaga is popular...then, there you are...
In this vein, Beethoven's Late String Quartets are barely popular (except for some few cognoscenti who believe in "depth", etc.), so, they are...a bit above trash.
Of course, the "entertainment" card explains a lot, but not all. Mozart is entertainment too, but of some highest order, if that matters.
By the way, I'm against any comparisons, at least between composers of Classical Music, and, whenever there is any voting of that kind, I try to dumb down the whole endeavour as not worthy or irrelevant.

Principe


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

principe said:


> By the way, I'm against any comparisons, at least between composers of Classical Music, and, whenever there is any voting of that kind, I try to dumb down the whole endeavour as not worthy or irrelevant.


I must agree with you there, principe. One of the wonderful things about classical music is its rich heterogeneity. I love different things in Monteverdi and Britten and Verdi and Mozart and Wagner and Benjamin and Handel and Puccini and so on. But if anyone asks me which is best, or my favourite, I'd usually have to say "Whatever I watched last night".


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

mamascarlatti said:


> I must agree with you there, principe. One of the wonderful things about classical music is its rich heterogeneity. I love different things in Monteverdi and Britten and Verdi and Mozart and Wagner and Benjamin and Handel and Puccini and so on. But if anyone asks me which is best, or my favourite, I'd usually have to say "Whatever I watched last night".


i second that


----------

