Calling all classical music FBGs (1 Viewer)

[Roy L. Fuchs]

Ok so I have some Beethoven, Bach, and some Vivaldi, but I want to expand my classical music library. What are some must haves I need?

Go-

 

[jdoggydogg]

Ok so I have some Beethoven, Bach, and some Vivaldi, but I want to expand my classical music library. What are some must haves I need?Go-

BrahmsChopinDebussyDvorakMendelssohnProkofievRavelPaganiniIf you want something more metal:BartokStravinskySchoenbergIf you want to rent some opera DVDs, you can't go wrong with:VerdiPucciniMozartDonizetti

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

May I suggest throwing the above names in Pandora? You get a great blend of classical options and can write down the ones you really like.

I'm a big Vivaldi fan, and have been getting some good stuff from this.

 

[Ozymandias]

Mozart's Clarinet Concerto

Mozart Requiem

Brahms Academic Festival Overture

Brahms Symphony No. 2

Tchaikovsky 1812 Overture

Tchaikovsky Symphony No. 5

 

[joffer]

not sure what happened to the OP, but i've recently discovered a genuine admiration of classical music. i'm wondering if this is just a passing fancy or I could really develop a love for it.

other than knowing who the biggies are, i'm pretty much a noob, so any suggestions would be appreciated.

 

[Osaurus]

Wagner (Vognur)

 

[Harrassment Panda]

Big fan of Vivaldi and Berlioz.

 

[DevilsTrifecta]

Lots of good names thrown around in here. I would also add Moussorgsky.

 

[jdoggydogg]

not sure what happened to the OP, but i've recently discovered a genuine admiration of classical music. i'm wondering if this is just a passing fancy or I could really develop a love for it.other than knowing who the biggies are, i'm pretty much a noob, so any suggestions would be appreciated.

The composers I mentioned are all fantastic. If you're looking for specific CDs, you can't go wrong with theseaganini - "24 Caprices for Solo Violin"Bach - "Mass in B Minor", "The Brandenburg Concertos"Mozart - "Requiem, Piano Sonata In B Flat, Piano Concerto #22"Chopin - "André Watts: The Chopin Recital"Beethoven "Piano Sonatas", "Symphonies #5 & 7"Vivaldi - "Gloria", "The Four Seasons"Mendelssohn - "A Midsummer Night's Dream"Giuseppe Verdi - RequiemProkofiev - "Romeo & Juliet"Ravel - "Piano Concerto", "Bolero"Operauccini - "La Boheme", "La Fille Du Regiment"

 

[GroveDiesel]

Just a tip that there is a fairly decent amount of free classical MP3s on Amazon.

Also, the "99 Most Essential" series of MP3 albums on Amazon are all priced around $5 and have a lot of music. They're not performed by the top symphonies or anything, but it's not a bad way to get a ton of classical music rather cheaply.

Here's one free classical album to start: I Love The 80's (1880s)

 

[wikkidpissah]

I have over 500 classical CDs but, the last coupla years, I have played the sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti more than all the others combined. The math of Bach, the magic of Mozart, the modernity of summin that popped into Keith Jarrett's head last week.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I have over 500 classical CDs but, the last coupla years, I have played the sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti more than all the others combined. The math of Bach, the magic of Mozart, the modernity of summin that popped into Keith Jarrett's head last week.

I need some Scarlatti.

 

[joffer]

thanks for the suggestions

 

[wikkidpissah]

I have over 500 classical CDs but, the last coupla years, I have played the sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti more than all the others combined. The math of Bach, the magic of Mozart, the modernity of summin that popped into Keith Jarrett's head last week.

I need some Scarlatti.

You wont regret it. He has about 600 sonatinas, none over 10 minutes long & they are each a delight. The only box set is hundreds of dollars and on harpsichord (the instrument on which they were composed), but Naxos, the budget classical label, has released a half dozen discs compiling the best on piano. Because he went to Iberia to get out from under the shadow of his famous father (Alessandro, a foundational composer of opera), DScarlatti's sheet music went unnoticed and, indeed, was almost lost. This also kept him from influencing the Classical era of composers (Chopin was the 1st to cite him as an influence & one can hear that), which has resulted in his sound being newer/fresher to the modern ear than other Baroques. In fact, it honestly does sound like Keiths Jarrett or Emerson decided to try their hand at composing chamber music, startling when one considers that he died the year Mozart was born.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I have over 500 classical CDs but, the last coupla years, I have played the sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti more than all the others combined. The math of Bach, the magic of Mozart, the modernity of summin that popped into Keith Jarrett's head last week.

I need some Scarlatti.

You wont regret it. He has about 600 sonatinas, none over 10 minutes long & they are each a delight. The only box set is hundreds of dollars and on harpsichord (the instrument on which they were composed), but Naxos, the budget classical label, has released a half dozen discs compiling the best on piano. Because he went to Iberia to get out from under the shadow of his famous father (Alessandro, a foundational composer of opera), DScarlatti's sheet music went unnoticed and, indeed, was almost lost. This also kept him from influencing the Classical era of composers (Chopin was the 1st to cite him as an influence & one can hear that), which has resulted in his sound being newer/fresher to the modern ear than other Baroques. In fact, it honestly does sound like Keiths Jarrett or Emerson decided to try their hand at composing chamber music, startling when one considers that he died the year Mozart was born.

I know Scarlatti's work, I just never bought a CD. I am not a harpsichord fan. I prefer piano. In fact, my favorite Bach CD is a series of piano partitas that I am sure were composed for harpsichord.

 

[quotheraven]

"Ahhh, Bach."

 

[Parmcat]

.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I have over 500 classical CDs but, the last coupla years, I have played the sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti more than all the others combined. The math of Bach, the magic of Mozart, the modernity of summin that popped into Keith Jarrett's head last week.

I need some Scarlatti.

You wont regret it. He has about 600 sonatinas, none over 10 minutes long & they are each a delight. The only box set is hundreds of dollars and on harpsichord (the instrument on which they were composed), but Naxos, the budget classical label, has released a half dozen discs compiling the best on piano. Because he went to Iberia to get out from under the shadow of his famous father (Alessandro, a foundational composer of opera), DScarlatti's sheet music went unnoticed and, indeed, was almost lost. This also kept him from influencing the Classical era of composers (Chopin was the 1st to cite him as an influence & one can hear that), which has resulted in his sound being newer/fresher to the modern ear than other Baroques. In fact, it honestly does sound like Keiths Jarrett or Emerson decided to try their hand at composing chamber music, startling when one considers that he died the year Mozart was born.

I know Scarlatti's work, I just never bought a CD. I am not a harpsichord fan. I prefer piano. In fact, my favorite Bach CD is a series of piano partitas that I am sure were composed for harpsichord.

What Naxos is doing with the Scarlatti sonatas is greatness for sure. As usual I agree with a wikkid music suggestion. I have three volumes (1, 6 and 7; ea. chosen for the performer/performance) in my 50+ GB classical collection. I think they are up to volume 12 or 13 at this point. But I prefer the harpsichord, when it is the correct instrument, and when played by a virtuoso to any of the latter Baroque composers. It gives the music a sense of honesty the piano lacks (but I love these sonatas in other forms too). There is even some debate with Scarlatti and the assignment of instruments for some of the sonatas, fortepiano being believed to be correct by many. Scarlatti was in the service of Spanish royalty when he wrote them, so he certainly had access to the latest and greatest gear of his time. The term virtuoso is used a little loosely these days, but David Schrader has a very listenable CD out covering 18 or so Scarlatti sonatas on fortepiano that I recommend (highly) for anyone interested in that likely correct sound, whatever that means. The $200+ box set by Scott Ross of all 555 sonatas wikkid referred to can be 'shared' to you via Rapidshare. But I have a couple other strong reocmmendations. Igor Kipnis (rip) a true virtuoso and probably the world's foremost Scarlatti student/scholar recorded 30+ sonatas for harpsichord that can be found at Amazon very affordably. For me these ring true from the instrument to the interpretation. Interpretation being my issue with much of the piano recordings being released in the Naxos series (some have 20th and 21st century vibes that I prefer to hear from 20th and 21st century music). Sorry if that seems pretentious. It's not. I'm barely a layman, but I dig the history as much as anything. I'm tossing this up for everyone, but in your direction particularly wikkid, Andres Segovia and Juilan Bream both have recorded a bunch of these sonatas and while it could just be my love of guitar overriding everything else, these are by far my favorite renditions/interpretations and I suggest digging around for them and maybe plucking the Scarlatti for .99 each or whatever and making a guitar/Scarlatti mix. Afaik, they don't have CDs dedicated to Scarlatti, just a sonata or four here and a few more over there. A mix like this would definitely make my top 10 desert island classical collection. Afterall harpsichord, fortepiano, piano, guitar - all strings ya know. Segovia, Bream - pretty talented folk. I love the comments to this youtube. "Fantastico... Lindo! ... Just perfect... One of the best performances in the history of music... Even the birds are enchanted with this!... Es impresionante como un gran repertorio de Scarlatti para el clavecin se adapte tanto a nuestra guitarra. Maravilloso!!" Agreed.

A final note on classical music that I think is reflected in my above comments. Too often, it seems to me, these discussions are completely about the composers to collect and learn... and that is great... but, I think the best way to learn, enjoy and appreciate classical music is to collect the great performers and performances. For example, jdog has Paganini's 24 Caps for Solo Violin atop his list. I say bravo, definitely coming to the desert island with me too, but Paganini (pre recording history unfortunately so we cannot say for sure) is possibly the greatest violin player to ever live. Nevermind him as a composer. In a biblical sense I knew first chair, violin, LA philharmonic way back in my background and Paganini frustrated her to know end. He was impossible to play with her small hands. He even deliberately crafted compositions that only he could master, and such incredible solos they are. You can find cheap "small handed" recordings that just don't cut it. Or you can collect Perlman. Do you want some talent show winner from Poland on a budget label covering Jimi Hendrix or would rather listen to Stevie Ray? Just sayin'.

 

[Spaz]

Classicaldot.

 

[Kovax]

Albinoni not mentioned yet.

Look into the Baroque period.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Wagner (Vognur)

 

[perry147]

I know Scarlatti's work, I just never bought a CD. I am not a harpsichord fan. I prefer piano. In fact, my favorite Bach CD is a series of piano partitas that I am sure were composed for harpsichord.

The Misha Maisky interpretation of the Bach Cello suites is my favorite Bach CD.

 

[warpedone]

Rachmaninoff but I'm a piano freak.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Rachmaninoff but I'm a piano freak.

Ah, I knew I forgot something. I'm not a big fan of Vladimir Horowitz, but he is one of the most gifted classical piano players of the last 100 years. Too creative with some of his stuff, but sometimes that's a product of enormous talent. Anyway, I meant to toss this into the post about Scarlatti and went on a tangent. Again, while much of the budget label stuff is terrific, this is piano/scarlatti gold to me - Horowitz plays Scarlatti with great respect.

 

[jdoggydogg]

But I prefer the harpsichord, when it is the correct instrument, and when played by a virtuoso to any of the latter Baroque composers. It gives the music a sense of honesty the piano lacks

Yeah, I don't know about that. But I guess it all comes down to personal taste

 

[jdoggydogg]

I know Scarlatti's work, I just never bought a CD. I am not a harpsichord fan. I prefer piano. In fact, my favorite Bach CD is a series of piano partitas that I am sure were composed for harpsichord.

The Misha Maisky interpretation of the Bach Cello suites is my favorite Bach CD.

I love those cello suites.

 

[Osaurus]

Dmitri Shostakovich

 

[Chaos Commish]

Below is my introduction to building an absurdly incomplete, but imo on point foundation for a classical music library that hopefully creates (some discussion) and a lifetime of expanded listening for someone seeking such a thing but not sure how best to dive in. I surveyed my collection and made a brief outline that will require at least a dozen posts.

Briefly, if I can (which is unlikely), my own introduction to classical, after the childhood indoctrination of Looney Tunes, was dating a virtuouso who's been fourth and better chair violin from the LA Phil, to Chicago, St. Louis, and points in Europe I won't identify lest I identify her against her wishes. We dated for six months, mid 80s, when she was well known (in those circles) for being a once very young, brilliant talent who survived a disastrous marriage that cost her dearly (as a musician). She was, for me, the proverbial older woman. And she taught me more about classical music in six months than I have learned in the past eight years of daily listening and monthly collecting. Well, maybe not, but it's close. I've mentioned a couple times that my divorce (8 years ago) influenced my listening. I don't care for lyrics much anymore, finding them lame and sophomoric, and have been on an 8 year instrumental kick in many formats, primarily jazz and classical. The classical collection I've carefully developed over the past 8 years will be highlighted in this thread. I'm confident it's an excellent road map that highlights the great landmarks, most of the best scenery, avoids ugly potholes and unnecessary detours, but by no means is the only way down the road. I'm barely qualified to do this so hopefully some others will join in and direct us down other quality paths.

In the jazz thread that vanished faster than this one, I reserved Django Reinhardt because I thought it would be entertaining to write, and hopefully enlightening to others, if I did him better justice than online bios. He deserves it. I didn't know it at the time, but amazing Django gives me writer's block. I have to write a history of gypsy culture and music to get him in correct perspective, which makes it a very cool story -- and Johnny Depp better get it right in the movie being made, but he won't, because it isn't politically correct to do so... so yeah. I love Django's story more than his music and I'm a huge fan of his music. When I started to write about him, I began with this statement: Jazz guitarist Django Reinhardt may be the singular most transcendent and influential musician of the past century. I can defend that with some pretty strong support. But, I'm going to do this classical map thing first.

In seeking a starting point for Django, I recalled that he was an admirer of the classical composer Debussy, whom he saw approaching his musical ideal between freedom and perfection. I dig Debussy and much of the impressionist classical music he spawned (Ravel's Bolero anyone?), so that seemed like a great place to start, common ground between me and Django. And when I get to those impressionists, I'll have some comments about the future of classical music, which I think is very bright, even soon resurgent, so get on board now; but, I can't cover Debussyism without discussing my favorite era (historically, not musically), the generation or two prior to him, the post-Beethovians -- Rossini, Pagganini, Berlioz, Wagner, Schubert, Strauss, Mendelssohn, Chopin, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms, etc. -- plenty I like that you may not, some I don't care for that you will; some I despise on principle (Herr Wagner, and I'm looking at you too Chopin). Then, I can't really enjoy discussing post-Beethovians without covering... er... Beethoven, who changed everything. And wth if I'm going to start with Beethoven, I might as well include my personal favorite and his early idol, Mozart.

So that was the process that brought me from reserving Django in the dead jazz thread to deciding to do a timscochet on classical music. I'm a notorious flake when it comes to writing and deadlines, so who knows how far I'll get. The next post was outlined (in my head) while writing this one, so it will be posted soon enough. I will keep them all much much briefer than this.

The basic idea is to introduce an era or other topic, do some basic bio and other historical tidbits, and advise on what to collect regarding what to me is the most important aspect of enjoying classical music -- the correct orchestras, conductors, musicians, performances, and recordings (note: composers not mentioned). Alvin and Chipmunks just covered The Kinks afterall.

My first recommendation is a book, and only if you feel like I once did, intimidated by the foreign language that is classical music.

The NPR Classical Music Companion: An Essential Guide for Enlightened Listening

It's cheap. It's light, easy reading. It answers most your questions. I concur with the reviews at Amazon. You can buy far far worse tombs on the topic. Most books on classical music are rarely honest (from a non fiction perspective), usually steeped in some strange bias, and not worth the time or money, imo.

Next post:

The Holy Trinity of Composers

I think the first two (Ludwig and Wolfie) are obvious. Anyone care to guess the third? No need to debate whether there is such a trinity if the idea doesn't work for you because that's just fine. It works for me, but it is very easy to attack.

 

[Chaos Commish]

But I prefer the harpsichord, when it is the correct instrument, and when played by a virtuoso to any of the latter Baroque composers. It gives the music a sense of honesty the piano lacks

Yeah, I don't know about that. But I guess it all comes down to personal taste

I agree most things come down to personal taste, but not what I was suggesting above about a sense of honesty. For example, Van Halen's cover of You Really Got Me is more honest to the Kinks than Alvin and the Chipmunks. At least Van Halen has the instruments and tempo right. You may prefer Alvin and the Chipmunks like I prefer an instrumental classical guitar version of Stairway to Led Zep's, but that is not a more honest rendition. I prefer guitar for Scarlatti sonatas to the more honest piano and the 100% honest harpsichord. That's what I meant by honesty and the difference of it and whatever we may prefer. With harpsichord your hear what Scarlatti wrote for the instrument he wrote it for and come the closest to the truth of what he heard. He didn't live long enough to hear a piano as we know them.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I think the first two (Ludwig and Wolfie) are obvious. Anyone care to guess the third? No need to debate whether there is such a trinity if the idea doesn't work for you because that's just fine. It works for me, but it is very easy to attack.

The obvious choice for third is Bach. Although I could make an argument for Chopin.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I think the first two (Ludwig and Wolfie) are obvious. Anyone care to guess the third? No need to debate whether there is such a trinity if the idea doesn't work for you because that's just fine. It works for me, but it is very easy to attack.

The obvious choice for third is Bach. Although I could make an argument for Chopin.

Bach it is. Tchaikovsky is heartily defended by his fans too. Vivaldi gets supporters based on his huge modern sales record. As does Handel for the simple reason both Mozart and Beethoven idolized him and refused to believe they had surpassed him. But what I notice in classical forums or elsewhere when the favorite composer or top ten or whatever is asked-- is that Bach, Beethoven, Mozart tend to pull away from the crowd after a few dozen always varied lists. So I consider them a trinity or three cornerstones for learning and building a solid collection. You can skip many a composer and not miss a thing, but you cannot skip these three.eta: that last sentence is also very easy to attack...

 

[wikkidpissah]

Bach is not the best composer, but is the most important by far. Luddy & Wolfy got their influences & inspiration more from Handel & Haydn than JSB because they were more in the public domain, but Bach was first to capture what the world had been waiting for the 2000 yrs since Pythagoras hypothesized that music was the math of life - render nature, human experience & godly inspiration down to its fractal elements. I prefer to think of it this way - Bach is God's voice; Mozart, His mind; Beethoven, His heart. nufced

 

[jdoggydogg]

I think the first two (Ludwig and Wolfie) are obvious. Anyone care to guess the third? No need to debate whether there is such a trinity if the idea doesn't work for you because that's just fine. It works for me, but it is very easy to attack.

The obvious choice for third is Bach. Although I could make an argument for Chopin.

Bach it is. Tchaikovsky is heartily defended by his fans too. Vivaldi gets supporters based on his huge modern sales record. As does Handel for the simple reason both Mozart and Beethoven idolized him and refused to believe they had surpassed him. But what I notice in classical forums or elsewhere when the favorite composer or top ten or whatever is asked-- is that Bach, Beethoven, Mozart tend to pull away from the crowd after a few dozen always varied lists. So I consider them a trinity or three cornerstones for learning and building a solid collection. You can skip many a composer and not miss a thing, but you cannot skip these three.eta: that last sentence is also very easy to attack...

Everything is easy to attack. Vivaldi doesn't belong in the conversation for the top five. Chopin was a brilliant, groundbreaking composer. Handel has his supporters, but I much prefer Chopin.

 

[wikkidpissah]

There is little doubt in my mind that the best & most important composer outside the big three is Franz Schubert. Power 2nd only to LWB & dexterity (his sonata, quartets & lieder are perhaps even more brilliant than the larger works) 2nd behind only WAM.

 

[Sammy Traveller]

fantasy football & classical music. who'da thunk?

 

[Abraham]

I always feel a lot smarter and superior to everyone around me when I listen to classical. I think Beethoven, Bach, and Mozart is a heck of a starting place. Rakmaninov (sp) is also very solid. I'll look in to some of the ones above as well.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Bach is not the best composer, but is the most important by far. Luddy & Wolfy got their influences & inspiration more from Handel & Haydn than JSB because they were more in the public domain, but Bach was first to capture what the world had been waiting for the 2000 yrs since Pythagoras hypothesized that music was the math of life - render nature, human experience & godly inspiration down to its fractal elements. I prefer to think of it this way - Bach is God's voice; Mozart, His mind; Beethoven, His heart. nufced

Nice quote, except Mozart's music had oodles of heart and some consider Beethoven to be quite aloof.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Bach is not the best composer, but is the most important by far. Luddy & Wolfy got their influences & inspiration more from Handel & Haydn than JSB because they were more in the public domain, but Bach was first to capture what the world had been waiting for the 2000 yrs since Pythagoras hypothesized that music was the math of life - render nature, human experience & godly inspiration down to its fractal elements. I prefer to think of it this way - Bach is God's voice; Mozart, His mind; Beethoven, His heart. nufced

Nice quote, except Mozart's music had oodles of heart and some consider Beethoven to be quite aloof.

A lot of Mozart's music was hollow and composed just so he could make a buck.

Where to start...Hollow? No. Your assertion presumes all these composers weren't doing the same. Bach had a large family to feed, and he was payed well to write his phenomenal Mass in B Minor. Your accusation against Mozart could be made against any of these guys.

 

[Abrantes]

In the jazz thread that vanished faster than this one, I reserved Django Reinhardt because I thought it would be entertaining to write, and hopefully enlightening to others, if I did him better justice than online bios. He deserves it. I didn't know it at the time, but amazing Django gives me writer's block. I have to write a history of gypsy culture and music to get him in correct perspective, which makes it a very cool story -- and Johnny Depp better get it right in the movie being made, but he won't, because it isn't politically correct to do so... so yeah. I love Django's story more than his music and I'm a huge fan of his music. When I started to write about him, I began with this statement: Jazz guitarist Django Reinhardt may be the singular most transcendent and influential musician of the past century. I can defend that with some pretty strong support. But, I'm going to do this classical map thing first.

I need to track down the jazz thread now. Django is the man.This thread could use some Mahler love, though.

 

[Otis]

GUEST????

 

[jdoggydogg]

Bach is not the best composer, but is the most important by far. Luddy & Wolfy got their influences & inspiration more from Handel & Haydn than JSB because they were more in the public domain, but Bach was first to capture what the world had been waiting for the 2000 yrs since Pythagoras hypothesized that music was the math of life - render nature, human experience & godly inspiration down to its fractal elements. I prefer to think of it this way - Bach is God's voice; Mozart, His mind; Beethoven, His heart. nufced

Nice quote, except Mozart's music had oodles of heart and some consider Beethoven to be quite aloof.

A lot of Mozart's music was hollow and composed just so he could make a buck.

Where to start...Hollow? No. Your assertion presumes all these composers weren't doing the same. Bach had a large family to feed, and he was payed well to write his phenomenal Mass in B Minor. Your accusation against Mozart could be made against any of these guys.

I'm not saying all of it is hollow, just a portion...when I say "a lot," that is more in recognition of the fact there is a lot of compositions attributed to Mozart. Most of the compositions from the mid 1780s are mediocre at best. Mozart's legend is that of a child prodigy and I don't believe he was the composer for many of the works for which he took the credit. Great player? yes...great composer? I have my doubts.

I'd love it if you could post a link to this assertion, as I'd be interested in reading it.

 

[Abraham]

I'd love it if you could post a link to this assertion, as I'd be interested in reading it.

Looking.... I learned in college that many of Mozarts early compositions were simply remixes of other artists at the time or were done by his father.

 

[perry147]

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0030GQC08/?tag=slickdeals

The 99 Most Essential Brahms Masterpieces (Amazon Exclusive) = $1.99

A freaking STEAL!!!!

 

[jdoggydogg]

I'd love it if you could post a link to this assertion, as I'd be interested in reading it.

My opinion has come from various sources who have questioned Mozart.

It's not an uncommon opinion that Leopold (Mozart's father) may have had a stronger hand in the early writings than is generally accepted. After all, he was Mozart's main influence and, if I recall correctly, their style was very similar right down to the actual hand writing. There are also many people that believe M. Haydn composed many works that Mozart put his name on and that Mozart copied a lot of J. Haydn's work. It's well known Mozart was a degenerate gambler and was in debt most of his life. The theory being that a man with such a troubled life wouldn't be able to compose the type of music he did as often as he did. Many people believe that Mozart stole a lot of "his" music to make money.

Yes. I'd like to see a link.

 

[DevilsTrifecta]

Rachmaninoff but I'm a piano freak.

I saw Olga Kern play with the Denver Symphony in October. Was the most amazing Rachmaninoff performance I've ever heard.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I'd love it if you could post a link to this assertion, as I'd be interested in reading it.

My opinion has come from various sources who have questioned Mozart.

It's not an uncommon opinion that Leopold (Mozart's father) may have had a stronger hand in the early writings than is generally accepted. After all, he was Mozart's main influence and, if I recall correctly, their style was very similar right down to the actual hand writing. There are also many people that believe M. Haydn composed many works that Mozart put his name on and that Mozart copied a lot of J. Haydn's work. It's well known Mozart was a degenerate gambler and was in debt most of his life. The theory being that a man with such a troubled life wouldn't be able to compose the type of music he did as often as he did. Many people believe that Mozart stole a lot of "his" music to make money.

Yes. I'd like to see a link.

There is no direct link. I'll see if I can find some sources from when/what I was taught in school...Abraham said he would do the same.

There's links if you look in Mozart discussion forums. The nonsense is thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory, or wild speculation based on thin specious evidence and not worth our time. I've looked at it and think it's bunk, but whatever. Even if true it means next to nothing regarding the quality of the music. It's akin to not believing we landed on the moon or **** Cheney planned 9/11, afaic. I am talking about the "Tobaga research" that anoints "some unknown Luchesi dude" as the composer of Mozart's 41st and goes from there to cast doubt on tons of other Mozart compositions. His bio is incomplete but carefully documented. That stuff is the nonsense. The historical Mozart isn't much of a mystery.When he was broke and or inspired, he composed like a madman and frightened those who cared about him because of the manic fervor of his writing episodes. That three incredible symphonies all worthy of any top twenty list were all composed in a 10 day period is part of the historical record. That type of genius sure could lead some to believe he must have been stealing or something, but he wasn't. He was a musical freak beyond compare in that particular light. He was also an idiot. I could parallel him to Michael Jackson from childhood star to revolutionary genius to dead to soon. Some of these same conspiracy theorists believe he didn't really die but went on to live to a ripe old age in obscurity like Elvis. I would add this: Who sounds like Mozart? I can pick him out in ten seconds even if I have never heard the track before. His style is unique. If some other composer had written some of these gems Mozart was running around stealing or buying, where's his music? Why didn't he go to the authorities or claim it was stolen? Was he dead and Mozart had a cache of musical treasures? Stop it.

However, there is legit scholarly reasons to call many of his lesser works into question. The same can be said of many of his predecessors and some, less but some, of those who followed him. This is a balanced discussion. I can add a lot to that, but the topic doesn't interest me much. In the end Mozart wrote way more that he didn't get credit for than the laundry list of stuff credited to him that was his dad's or someone else's. Stuff gets lost, confused, unorganized, especially with immature drunken disorganized geniuses. Haydn outlived him and surely would have mentioned any of his work being stolen. That idea is ignorant. Mozart did have perfect pitch. He could write music as fast as he heard it and used this gift to study the works of others, many others, including Haydn. He would listen, write, study, and often invent from there. A lot of this writing was layered in shuffled stacks in his home. Many of his phrases developed into melodies and then on to giant symphonic themes were lifted from folk songs he played in his youth. That's genius, not theft and common to hundreds of composers.

He did die before completing Requiem. His friend, Sussmayr finished it and stated adamantly it was all Mozart when he presented it to Costanze (the widow Mozart) about three months after Mozart's death. This was untrue. The truth is the awesome ending of Requiem is likely Sussmayr and Mozart was just the inspiration. He did not dictate to Sussmayr as the movie would have you believe he did to Salieri. Sussmayr was a student of Salieri and he did work for, as in he was in the paid employment, of Mozart as a copyest. They were good friends and Mozart included works of Sussmayr in several of his live performances, as an opening act or in interludes. That too may contribute to some confusion. Letters between Sussmayr and Costanze revealed a very great love between all three of them, debunked the idea that Sussmayr was Mozart's student (something Costanze created to sell Requiem without issue and for more money). See if it was dead Wolfie's it was worth much more, so they contrived that bit. It wasn't that much of a sacrifice for Sussmayr financially because he parlayed his association with it and Mozart into a genuinely successful music career in Vienna.

Anyway. Very glad to see the discussion.

 

[Flying V]

I really like Scheherazade (Rimsky-Korsakov).

 

[Chaos Commish]

Bach is not the best composer, but is the most important by far. Luddy & Wolfy got their influences & inspiration more from Handel & Haydn than JSB because they were more in the public domain, but Bach was first to capture what the world had been waiting for the 2000 yrs since Pythagoras hypothesized that music was the math of life - render nature, human experience & godly inspiration down to its fractal elements. I prefer to think of it this way - Bach is God's voice; Mozart, His mind; Beethoven, His heart. nufced

Nice quote, except Mozart's music had oodles of heart and some consider Beethoven to be quite aloof.

A lot of Mozart's music was hollow and composed just so he could make a buck.

Where to start...Hollow? No. Your assertion presumes all these composers weren't doing the same. Bach had a large family to feed, and he was payed well to write his phenomenal Mass in B Minor. Your accusation against Mozart could be made against any of these guys.

I'm not saying all of it is hollow, just a portion...when I say "a lot," that is more in recognition of the fact there is a lot of compositions attributed to Mozart. Most of the compositions from the mid 1780s are mediocre at best. Mozart's legend is that of a child prodigy and I don't believe he was the composer for many of the works for which he took the credit. Great player? yes...great composer? I have my doubts.

I agree with some of this and was just writing about it for my trinity post. As a child prodigy, he was very slow to mature. As a young musician much of his stuff is brilliant and witty, but more charming than astounding. Once he hit his late 20s and life began to mess with him, he absolutely became a great composer, imo. Chopin, for example, was a child prodigy who was writing brilliant untouchable compositions in his teens. Mozart, not so much. But later Mozart surpassed most and is competition for any, personal taste depending.

 

[Chaos Commish]

In the jazz thread that vanished faster than this one, I reserved Django Reinhardt because I thought it would be entertaining to write, and hopefully enlightening to others, if I did him better justice than online bios. He deserves it. I didn't know it at the time, but amazing Django gives me writer's block. I have to write a history of gypsy culture and music to get him in correct perspective, which makes it a very cool story -- and Johnny Depp better get it right in the movie being made, but he won't, because it isn't politically correct to do so... so yeah. I love Django's story more than his music and I'm a huge fan of his music. When I started to write about him, I began with this statement: Jazz guitarist Django Reinhardt may be the singular most transcendent and influential musician of the past century. I can defend that with some pretty strong support. But, I'm going to do this classical map thing first.

I need to track down the jazz thread now. Django is the man.This thread could use some Mahler love, though.

Mahler (1,5,9) made the cut for the 'essentials for a noob' idea, but not by much. I'm looking at 117 recordings at the moment. Pfft. I should have never started. I wrote more about Django in this post than the other, btw. He really is a good topic if we ever have a legit jazz discussion.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I always feel a lot smarter and superior to everyone around me when I listen to classical.

Because you are smarter. Superior is a matter of opinion. Give K.448 a listen and be smarter. It may be witty and possibly hollow, but it's delightful, and my kid doesn't understand why I made her work so hard on it.

And yes haters, before you debunk the Mozart Effect, I know it's based on bad science, but there does seem to be something there according to a pretty solid source in the first link.