Another list of the top ten classical composers

[Don C]

https://flip.it/05pDkn10 of the greatest classical composers of all time

 

[GSOphile]

IMO a better list would have included Handel, Bach's contemporary.

 

[astrotoy]

The problem of humans having 10 fingers.

 

[bazelio]

The only problem I see with this list is Bach is only on it once.

 

[tima]

No Mahler, no Shostakovich, no Sibelius.

 

[Al M.]

I fully agree with the inclusion of the following 6 composers in the list:

Schubert
Debussy
Stravinsky
Mozart
Beethoven
Bach

For inclusion in a Top Ten of all time, Wagner and Chopin were in my view too limited in diversity of output, to mostly opera and piano, respectively. Because of their limited output, I wouldn’t want two giants among symphonists, Bruckner and Mahler, in a Top Ten list either, even though especially Bruckner is a huge favorite of mine.

I think a strong case could be made for Haydn. One of the most underrated composers of all time. Huge, incredibly varied output of mostly fantastic quality, but just too unknown (who knows that he wrote wonderful piano sonatas, 62 of them?). He was also one of the most innovative classical composers, making huge contributions to the development of symphony and string quartet, and just being consistently inventive. This article makes a good case for Haydn:

Haydn - the poor man’s Mozart?

In the two centuries since his death Joseph Haydn has been scandalously underrated, argues Richard Wigmore

www.gramophone.co.uk

***

For the 20th century, I would have candidates other than Stravinsky as well.

 

[LL21]

Having read thru some of these posts, I would agree in my own personal Top 10...Bach, Handel and Mozart for sure and also Haydn.

 

[bazelio]

I fully agree with the inclusion of the following 6 composers in the list:

Schubert
Debussy
Stravinsky
Mozart
Beethoven
Bach

For inclusion in a Top Ten of all time, Wagner and Chopin were in my view too limited in diversity of output, to mostly opera and piano, respectively. Because of their limited output, I wouldn’t want two giants among symphonists, Bruckner and Mahler, in a Top Ten list either, even though especially Bruckner is a huge favorite of mine.

I think a strong case could be made for Haydn. One of the most underrated composers of all time. Huge, incredibly varied output of mostly fantastic quality, but just too unknown (who knows that he wrote wonderful piano sonatas, 62 of them?). He was also one of the most innovative classical composers, making huge contributions to the development of symphony and string quartet, and just being consistently inventive. This article makes a good case for Haydn:

Haydn - the poor man’s Mozart?

In the two centuries since his death Joseph Haydn has been scandalously underrated, argues Richard Wigmore

www.gramophone.co.uk

***

For the 20th century, I would have candidates other than Stravinsky as well.

So at least in part, you're suggesting versatility as a key watchword for such rankings. Thus specialists such as Mahler should be excluded. This seems reasonable. Why do you think subjectively, a Mahler has less standing? E.g. Mahler never appears in a yearly most-programmed top 10 list. As a lay symphony concert goer, my feelings on Mahler are - too lengthy, too indulgent. I don't even find the famous adagietto from Mahler's 5th terribly moving. In the German Romanticism category, I'll take Bruckner.

 

[Kingrex]

Is Rush Hemisphere classical

 

[Gregm]

No Mahler, no Shostakovich, no Sibelius.

Hear (x3)!
And, while we're at it, Rachmaninov, Ravel... Don't know if Id have Stravinsky so high, great though he may be.

 

[bazelio]

Is Rush Hemisphere classical

Close. Classic, yes; classical, no.

 

[rando]

I think tastes are too narrow these days. Not Rush Hemisphere too narrow.

For inclusion in a Top Ten of all time, Wagner and Chopin were in my view too limited in diversity of output, to mostly opera and piano, respectively. Because of their limited output, I wouldn’t want two giants among symphonists, Bruckner and Mahler, in a Top Ten list either, even though especially Bruckner is a huge favorite of mine.

Prodigious and variegated compositional oeuvre can in many cases be taken to mean there was much in the immediate proximity to borrow from. You also need to admit to there being a considerable backlog of copied scores and diversely interpreted thoughts on them preceding their own involvement as modern times grew closer.

In art a solitary statement can resound for hundreds of years. Oddly enough these triumphs never figure in music lists such as this. Except those reflecting opinion popular forms of music only just got good to listen to in the last 70 years. Performances have become leveraged too heavily towards some composers for my liking. Examining staged and recorded material since the early 1950's I see very little diversity known to have existed in the previous 70 years.

Picking 10 Classical composers for every letter in the English language would at least enforce us to separate Bach from Symphonic Rock.

 

[Al M.]

So at least in part, you're suggesting versatility as a key watchword for such rankings. Thus specialists such as Mahler should be excluded. This seems reasonable.

Thanks.

Why do you think subjectively, a Mahler has less standing? E.g. Mahler never appears in a yearly most-programmed top 10 list. As a lay symphony concert goer, my feelings on Mahler are - too lengthy, too indulgent. I don't even find the famous adagietto from Mahler's 5th terribly moving. In the German Romanticism category, I'll take Bruckner.

Depends. I have the feeling that in our time Mahler is incredibly popular in some places. Here in Boston with the BSO certainly, he gets played very frequently. And any famous conductor these days wants to record a Mahler cycle, so the composer definitely has great standing.

The more I listen, the less lengthy the music becomes for me, too. More recently, I listened to the entire 35 minute Finale of the Resurrection Symphony (#2) absolutely riveted; while a friend found it a bit lengthy. But he is becoming more of a fan too, lately.

I'll grant you, Bruckner is more of a personal favorite of mine, as well. In fact, he is one of my all-time favorites.

 

[astrotoy]

I looked more carefully at the title. "10 of the Greatest Classical Composers of All Time", not the 10 greatest classical composers of all time. However, listing them in order gives a very different view than the title.

When I was starting college in the early '60's, one of the Stereo magazines featured a listing of the 100 greatest classical compositions and recommended recordings for each. That was a revelation for me since my previous exposure to classical music was largely limited to my parents' collection of mostly opera, and going into a record store (well before any digital media) was a maze of different composers and titles. So that gave me a start to at least sample what was considered great classical music. It forced me to listen to pieces more than one time if I didn't like the piece at first hearing to try to figure out why this was considered a great piece. That took me on a life long journey of exploration and collection. So if this list helps people start to explore, it is probably worth while. Certainly for aficionados this doesn't do much other than create a stir of why A and not B were included.

Larry

 

[Kingrex]

I have always wondered how to dive into classical. How to have an understanding what I like and what is important. I listen to a lot of it. I have favorites, but I don't know why.

I remember being at Joel Durand's place. I could not find albums I liked and asked how they were categorized. He said by Date. It made sense why, but knowing so little about who came when, I could not find anything.

I like Vivaldi. Doesn't even make the list. I want to like Bach but can't grasp what he's going for. If I want religion I reach for Handel. Not on the list either.

 

[bazelio]

It sounds like you should explore the Baroque era, except for not liking Bach. Lol, that's a tough pill to swallow for me. Try the Brandenburg Concertos? TBH Baroque really all I listen to. I realize that means I'm missing out on a lot of potentially excellent music. I venture out here and there, but Baroque music fits like a glove for me and I am happy sticking to what I know. By the way, the performance is everything. I only want to listen to period instruments. And I found Ton Koopman and the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra to be my cup of tea. I think I have every CD Ton Koopman did. But I don't listen to CDs anymore. Very few of them are available on LP. You might want to find a conductor you like and then find his/her Bach works.

 

[bonzo75]

I have always wondered how to dive into classical. How to have an understanding what I like and what is important. ..I like Vivaldi. Doesn't even make the list. I want to like Bach but can't grasp what he's going for. If I want religion I reach for Handel. Not on the list either.

Don't decide on what you like yet. Look for good performers in your area. Well, at this stage you might not know who the good performers are, so just look for any major composers or pieces you are familiar with and start attending the concerts. before and after the concert, listen to that piece on your system or on youtube performed at least a couple of times, so that you have it in your subconscious when you attend the concert. At the concert, they will perform more than one piece. As you keep doing this, your awareness of what you like, who the performers are, will grow. Over time, start following the performers, they will lead you to some great music. If you hear a good classical recording, also book to attend the live show for that piece

Now, how do you find performers/pieces in your area. Use https://bachtrack.com/search-events - enter the city, you will see all performances planned there. You can further filter by artist, composer, piece, etc. You can add it to your plans either in your city or one which you are visiting. Eventually you will go through the whole cross section of pieces, performers, composers.

 

[bonzo75]

So at least in part, you're suggesting versatility as a key watchword for such rankings. Thus specialists such as Mahler should be excluded. This seems reasonable. Why do you think subjectively, a Mahler has less standing? E.g. Mahler never appears in a yearly most-programmed top 10 list. As a lay symphony concert goer, my feelings on Mahler are - too lengthy, too indulgent. I don't even find the famous adagietto from Mahler's 5th terribly moving. In the German Romanticism category, I'll take Bruckner.

Mahler's 5th is his worst. I think the start itself is off tune trying to just create loud sounds.

If you listen to Mahler and Beethoven, Mahler is good in parts and tunes. He doesn't have the continuity to hold you through all movements and entire symphonies like Beethoven. Also, symphony aside, he does not have much. Early piano quartet and Das... Lied. Look at how prolific some of the others are with a wide repertoire from solos for individual instruments, operas and arias, sonatas, concertos, leider. Bach I can listen to anything and be transfixed

I love parts of the first, second, third, seventh... Fourth is probably the most end to end consistent that I know. In all others I lose attention midway.

I haven't seen eighth live yet as it is not performed much but will try to at some point.

 

[the sound of Tao]

Classical music is like art, it’s very personal. Discovering classical music seemingly is largely an unfolding experience. Vivaldi is marvellous, so is Mahler and Bruckner but they are all about very different experiences. When you’ve spent 50 years journeying through the repertoire you will still find a vast horizon to discover. I remember a friend telling me that ultimately you end with chamber music and Brahms. I find this an oversimplification in ways. Everyone has their own journey and some have their own theories I suppose but really that isn’t possibly as important as just accepting where music takes you. It’s the same for jazz.

 

[rando]

I like Vivaldi. Doesn't even make the list. I want to like Bach but can't grasp what he's going for. If I want religion I reach for Handel. Not on the list either.

Spirituality is a common component here. Of the bountiful and wholesome pleasures variety. Natural (as in derived from nature) music is in this case worthy of (restrained) mention.

Newly posted videos on (second restrained mention) youtube are at this moment one of the greatest resources on tap. You may find the revolution of thoughts in current suspension among those with deep knowledge of musical language inaccessible. A lockdown worth of being confined in a room alone with instrument and research material all spilling out at once. Europeans cannot move a km in any direction without being confronted by evocative reminders of this past so deeply embedded in them and this music. Personal attunement at any moment on a different continent should act at a far remove from the professional needs of those doing the performing.

The only instruction I'd suggest is not forcing yourself to attend to any advice. Go forth and enjoy your own impossible to chart course. Should a length of time expire unnoticed while absorbed in listening to something you enjoyed? That does not make it a required purchase or worthy of any further thought that day. I promise there is no end to the music that was written for enjoyable public consumption.


Requisite link for potential investigation.