Each country's finest composer

[rogch]

For instance, if one were to state (and has!) that Berio were "the greatest Italian composer" then it only follows that that person's choice for the greatest British composer might well be Humphrey Searle---and the greatest German composer Karl-Heinz Stockhausen or Hans-Werner Henze.

Likewise, if J. S. Bach were the greatest of all German composers, then Rameau must be tops in France, Purcell in England and Corelli or Vivaldi in Italy.

I don't see it that way. I don't think Berio was a better composer than Vivaldi or Verdi because modern music in general is better than baroque music or romantic music. What we can say that some composers stick out because they are among the best of their time. And when Johann Sebastian Bach arguably is the greatest of the zillion good baroque composers, that is a strong argument he must be one of Germany's greatest composers ever. And Berio is definitely one of the most exciting composers of his generation.

Honestly i don't know enough about Italian music to say without reservation that Berio is the greatest Italian composer ever, this is all about personal opinions. But just about everything i have heard of him is sensational: The sinfonia, the folk-songs, different sequenzas, his pieces for violin duo, Labyrinthus 2. Very different works too. So he is a strong contender.

[Länzchen]

Honestly i don't know enough about Italian music to say without reservation that Berio is the greatest Italian composer ever, this is all about personal opinions. But just about everything i have heard of him is sensational: The sinfonia, the folk-songs, different sequenzas, his pieces for violin duo, Labyrinthus 2. Very different works too. So he is a strong contender.

His Coro is one of my favourite pieces, and I expect his Sinfonia to be on the same level when I hear it. When it comes to the sequenzas the only one I have enjoyed was the one for harp; which ones do you like, Rogch?

[Sapphire]

Debussy once noted that he could never comprehend how a master of Schumann's greatness "allowed himself" to be influenced by that (mere clerk) Mendelssohn. Obviously, even Debussy had a "blind-spot" here and there.

I don't see much similarity between Schumann and Mendelssohn piano works. I also see little similarity between Schumann and Debussy piano works. I am not sure why "Prophetic Bird" is singled out for comparison with any of Debussy's piano works.

One interesting fact I read about Mendelssohn is that he wasn't aware that Schumann was a significant composer. He saw him mainly as the editor of a music journal and Clara's "other half".

To me Schumann's piano works are almost unique in style, with only some similarity with late Brahms. Incidentally, I understand that Brahms kept his late piano works Ops, 116-119 deliberately short in order not to place too much strain on Clara (ill after a stroke), who used to audition his piano works.

I thought it was well known that Debussy's main piano inspirations came from Liszt and Satie, not Schumann. And that Schumann's main influence was on Brahms and Franck.

If only Debussy fans would take the effort to listen to more Schumann they might discover even greater riches in this man's piano works.

Saphire

[Brahms]

Germany - Brahms
Austria - Schubert, Bruckner
Bohemia - Mahler
Poland - Penderecki
Russia - Tchaikovsky, Prokofiev
UK - RVW
US - Karl Henning, Ives
France - Berlioz, Ravel, Debussy
Sweden - Pettersson
Italy - Verdi
Hungary - Liszt, Bartok
Finland - Sibelius
Czech - Janacek, Dvorak
Romania - Ligeti



BTW, is Handel considered "German" or "English"?

[rogch]

When it comes to the sequenzas the only one I have enjoyed was the one for harp; which ones do you like, Rogch?

The one for saxophone i think is the favourite among those i have heard. The sequenza for trombone can be great fun too, but very much is down to the preformer in that piece.

[jbuck919]

Germany - Brahms
Austria - Schubert, Bruckner
Bohemia - Mahler
Poland - Penderecki
Russia - Tchaikovsky, Prokofiev
UK - RVW
US - Karl Henning, Ives
France - Berlioz, Ravel, Debussy
Sweden - Pettersson
Italy - Verdi
Hungary - Liszt, Bartok
Finland - Sibelius
Czech - Janacek, Dvorak
Romania - Ligeti



BTW, is Handel considered "German" or "English"?

I know you are a newer poster here, but you are a little late actually to be presenting a list when the thread has (thankfully) gone beyond that. And Mahler was not Bohemian, even in the figurative sense. And Brahms, as great as he was, would have laughed if he had been called the greates German composer. Laughed or chased you out of the room with a worthy insult.

Handel is a German composer. We who speak English are just lucky that he made the bulk of his career in England, though he was never comfortable with English. I've heard Messiah in the Mozart/van Swieten version and it is very convincing, unlike most arrangements. As though it was intended to be in German in the first place.

[Brahms]

And Mahler was not Bohemian, even in the figurative sense. And Brahms, as great as he was, would have laughed if he had been called the greates German composer.

1. Mahler was born Kalischt, Bohemia (today the Czech Republic).

2. The opening post eliminates Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart; after Bach and Beethoven, Brahms IS the greatest German composer.

[paulb]

2. The opening post eliminates Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart; after Bach and Beethoven, Brahms IS the greatest German composer.

Hi Brahms, glad to have you on board.
I guess you're happy I took bach and Beethoven off the playing field, as surely Brahms has the next greater output right there on the same level as Beethoven. Brahms was known to have looked very highly upon Beethoven and carefully studied all his teachers scores. Brahms was known to have adored Beethoven, his favorite composer....Sorry for that...I wanted to ask you if you have ever heard anything from a composer, german, though equallly one can claim he's just as much russian, I lean more towrads his germanic roots....anyway,,,have you heard anything by the german(russian lets assume he was german ) composer called Alfred Schnittke?

[Brahms]

have you heard anything by the german(russian lets assume he was german ) composer called Alfred Schnittke?

Paul,

I discovered Schnittke about a year ago, and, along with Ligeti and Pettersson, Schnittke ranks among my favorite modern-era composers. I enjoy his cello and violin concerti, his symphonies and concerto grossi, his requiem, and his chamber music.

[paulb]

have you heard anything by the german(russian lets assume he was german ) composer called Alfred Schnittke?

Paul,

I discovered Schnittke about a year ago, and, along with Ligeti and Pettersson, Schnittke ranks among my favorite modern-era composers. I enjoy his cello and violin concerti, his symphonies and concerto grossi, his requiem, and his chamber music.

Oh goodie, another, at least one other, member who not only has heard of both composers name, but knows the music, and actually says " among my favorite modern era composers" refering to both.
Look forward to reading your posts. Not just on P and S, but subjects in general.

Uh O, I should mention I do "not care" (putting it as nice as possible) for Ligeti.

[Brahms]

have you heard anything by the german(russian lets assume he was german ) composer called Alfred Schnittke?

Paul,

I discovered Schnittke about a year ago, and, along with Ligeti and Pettersson, Schnittke ranks among my favorite modern-era composers. I enjoy his cello and violin concerti, his symphonies and concerto grossi, his requiem, and his chamber music.

Oh goodie, another, at least one other, member who not only has heard of both composers name, but knows the music, and actually says " among my favorite modern era composers" refering to both.
Look forward to reading your posts. Not just on P and S, but subjects in general.

Uh O, I should mention I do "not care" (putting it as nice as possible) for Ligeti.

Paul, does CMG have a Pettersson thread? If not, you should start one.

Uh O, I should mention I do "not care" (putting it as nice as possible) for Ligeti.

Ligeti is a phenomenal composer. For example, his Etudes for solo piano are among the greatest and most difficult works written for any instrument. One of the towering pillars of 20th Century music.

Emotionally, I don't respond to Ligeti nearly as well as with Pettersson and Schnittke, but intellectually he's highly satisfying . . . . . . Ligeti's emotional content is more subtle and abstract.

He's probably not for you at this particular leg of your musical journey . . . . . . but perhaps someday . . . . . . .

[paulb]

Paul, does CMG have a Pettersson thread? If not, you should start one.

. . . . but perhaps someday . . . . . . .

A topic on Pettersson may not be a 'big hit" topic around these parts so i felt best just to plug his name and music whenever an opportunity arises. Same for Schnittke. A great thread for Pettersson can be found on GMG, Xanatus (sic) makes some wonderful expressive notations of each sym's inner character. AND it seems a few members recently have posted that they have bought into Pettersson, some are experimenting into a few of the syms. Really surprised me.
Schnittke is a whole different story, each person has to come to Schnittke on his own. That is difficult music, for the most part. But I love his music and have almost everything(98%) he wrote, and multiple recordings.

Ligeti, did not work out for me(something about me, not the music. The music is fine).

[jbuck919]

And Mahler was not Bohemian, even in the figurative sense. And Brahms, as great as he was, would have laughed if he had been called the greates German composer.

1. Mahler was born Kalischt, Bohemia (today the Czech Republic).

2. The opening post eliminates Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart; after Bach and Beethoven, Brahms IS the greatest German composer.

The opening post was the ultimate imbecility on this thread in the first place, and while you are technically correct on point 1, you know you are being silly. Hang around for a while, for we are a friendly bunch, before you contradict a senior poster on the site.

[Brahms]

and while you are technically correct on point 1, you know you are being silly. Hang around for a while, for we are a friendly bunch, before you contradict a senior poster on the site.

You might find characterizations of Mahler's nationality to be "silly," but I find it to be a factual reality. Mahler was a Bohemian-Austrian composer . . . . . . period.

[Sapphire]

and while you are technically correct on point 1, you know you are being silly. Hang around for a while, for we are a friendly bunch, before you contradict a senior poster on the site.

You might find characterizations of Mahler's nationality to be "silly," but I find it to be a factual reality. Mahler was a Bohemian-Austrian composer . . . . . . period.

Duke of Wellington: "Being born in a stable does not make one a horse."

Given that Mahler was born in Bohemia, doesn't that make him Czech? If so, why have you listed Mahler as your favourite Bohemian composer while nominating Janacek and Dvorak as your favourite Czeck composers? (I believe that Mahler's family soon moved to Moravia, which is still part of Cz).

I can see why you listed Brahms as your favourite German composer. As you say, Beethoven and Bach were ruled by the first post. I'd be interested to hear your views on Wagner. A lot of people would place him very close or even ahead of Brahms. Another (neutral) website I am familiar with has recently carried out a review based on various pieces of evidence and concluded that Wagner was the greater (in their opinion). It wasn't just the large number of Wagner masterpices. His influence played a big role in tipping the balance. They also referred to the large number of Wagner societies around the world, and more trivial things like a 10 year waiting list for tickets to Bayreuth.

Incidentally, my preference order for German composers is: (1) Beethoven, (2) Schumann, (3) Brahms.

Have you formed an opinion yet on how "friendly" this "bunch" is?


Saphire

[Länzchen]

I may not be a senior poster, but I saw no problem with your post Brahms

with Wagner, I find certain moments of his music to be of great beauty and emotional power, but in the longer structure of his operatic movements I find something lacking and his use of his leitmotifs boring and uninspired, with exceptions. The librettos are a mixed bag for me. Certainly I understand why he appeals to people though.

[Corlyss_D]

while you are technically correct on point 1, you know you are being silly. Hang around for a while, for we are a friendly bunch, before you contradict a senior poster on the site.

Facts is facts, senior poster or no.

[jbuck919]

while you are technically correct on point 1, you know you are being silly. Hang around for a while, for we are a friendly bunch, before you contradict a senior poster on the site.

Facts is facts, senior poster or no.

Mahler, who had an international career including a spell conducting the New York Philharmonic, would no more have considered himself a Bohemian than I consider myself a southerner because my father happened to be stationed in Alabama when I was born.

[paulb]

I may not be a senior poster, but I saw no problem with your post Brahms

with Wagner, I find certain moments of his music to be of great beauty and emotional power, but in the longer structure of his operatic movements I find something lacking and his use of his leitmotifs boring and uninspired, with exceptions. The librettos are a mixed bag for me. Certainly I understand why he appeals to people though.

I have no disagreements with this. Sure there are quite long uninspired passages in the Ring, a few places in Tristan and also Parsifal, but 2 things place Wagner ias the finest of germany , (including Bach and Beethoven, also Brahms)
First the highlights are well worth waiting for, quite moving music and voice. . Even Debussy and Ravel were enthralled by Wagner at his best.
But also wagner captures some of the great germanic myths set to music. There is much to learn from a psychological point of biew, strictly in a Jungian sense. Much commentary can be extracted from these legends and applied to modern society.
I hope one day to study the librettos.
I think the author of Lord Of The Rings got some idaes from Wagner's Ring Of The Neibulung.
had the germans properly understood Wagner's Ring opera, its possible that....or was it that Wagner was prophetic with his Ring, concerning the soon to be fulfilled fate of the german people.

[Brahms]

while you are technically correct on point 1, you know you are being silly. Hang around for a while, for we are a friendly bunch, before you contradict a senior poster on the site.

Facts is facts, senior poster or no.

Mahler, who had an international career including a spell conducting the New York Philharmonic, would no more have considered himself a Bohemian than I consider myself a southerner because my father happened to be stationed in Alabama when I was born.

You are incorrect here, jbuck. Gustav Mahler uttered this famous quote: "I am thrice homeless, as a native of Bohemia in Austria, as an Austrian among Germans, and as a Jew throughout the world. Everywhere an intruder, never welcomed."

Mahler himself declared that he was Bohemian and he considered himself to be Bohemian. It's exceedingly unlikely that Mahler would be unaware of his own nationality, or that he would declare that he was Bohemian if that were other than true.

[Jack Kelso]

Debussy once noted that he could never comprehend how a master of Schumann's greatness "allowed himself" to be influenced by that (mere clerk) Mendelssohn. Obviously, even Debussy had a "blind-spot" here and there.

I don't see much similarity between Schumann and Mendelssohn piano works. I also see little similarity between Schumann and Debussy piano works. I am not sure why "Prophetic Bird" is singled out for comparison with any of Debussy's piano works......I thought it was well known that Debussy's main piano inspirations came from Liszt and Satie, not Schumann. And that Schumann's main influence was on Brahms and Franck.

If only Debussy fans would take the effort to listen to more Schumann they might discover even greater riches in this man's piano works.

Saphire

You won't find much Mendelssohn in Schumann's piano or chamber music; Debussy might have been referring to the scherzo from the Symphony No. 2 in C Major, for which Mendelssohn imparted to Schumann some good advice! (Like Brahms/Joachim).

Remember---some "Mendelssohnian" influence was most likely Clara's, since her style was harmonically more related to Felix's than to her husband's.

Schumann's piano style influenced Grieg, Brahms, Tschaikowsky and Rachmaninoff (among others).

Are the music historians and I the only ones for whom "Prophet Bird" spells out D-E-B-U-S-S-Y...?

Sibelius once said, "The piano is an ungrateful instrument; only Chopin wrote brilliantly for it and Schumann and Debussy acceptably."

Jack

[Jack Kelso]

For instance, if one were to state (and has!) that Berio were "the greatest Italian composer" then it only follows that that person's choice for the greatest British composer might well be Humphrey Searle---and the greatest German composer Karl-Heinz Stockhausen or Hans-Werner Henze.

Likewise, if J. S. Bach were the greatest of all German composers, then Rameau must be tops in France, Purcell in England and Corelli or Vivaldi in Italy.

I don't see it that way. I don't think Berio was a better composer than Vivaldi or Verdi because modern music in general is better than baroque music or romantic music. What we can say that some composers stick out because they are among the best of their time....

Well, Roger---when I wrote that I was taking this thread quite seriously. Since then, I see that it's just a light conversation piece and anyone can claim anybody the greatest in any country.

My point was that comparisons between two masters---centuries away from each other---are usually patently ridiculous and do not help us to understand either of them. That's why I used contemporary masters from each country.....no one period is "better" than any other.

Jack

[Brahms]

I'd be interested to hear your views on Wagner. A lot of people would place him very close or even ahead of Brahms. Another (neutral) website I am familiar with has recently carried out a review based on various pieces of evidence and concluded that Wagner was the greater (in their opinion). It wasn't just the large number of Wagner masterpices. His influence played a big role in tipping the balance. They also referred to the large number of Wagner societies around the world, and more trivial things like a 10 year waiting list for tickets to Bayreuth.

Incidentally, my preference order for German composers is: (1) Beethoven, (2) Schumann, (3) Brahms.

Saphire

Wagner ranks very highly (#5) in my personal pantheon of immortal composers. And while I respect those who place Wagner ahead of Brahms (yeah, Wagner was more influential), I harbor two serious reservations about Wagner's music; specifically:

1. Wagner composed in only one genre. While Brahms mastered perhaps a dozen genres, Wagner never achieved greatness outside of the opera genre.

2. Wagner had no clue about musical economy (conciseness). Wagner seldom gave any thought to concluding an opera until at least three or four hours had elapsed.

But Brahms and Wagner are largely noncomparable -- two towering geniuses with distinctly different styles and temperaments: Wagner composed only operas; and Brahms composed everything but opera. In this case, it's impossible to say that one immortal is "greater" than the other. But if I were forced to choose, I would certainly opt for Brahms.

[Sapphire]

Brahms

Can I draw your attention to the following section of my previous post:

Given that Mahler was born in Bohemia, doesn't that make him Czech? If so, why have you listed Mahler as your favourite Bohemian composer while nominating Janacek and Dvorak as your favourite Czeck composers? (I believe that Mahler's family soon moved to Moravia, which is still part of Cz).

It appears not to have been answered in the subsequent exchanges. It's a very simple question. I'm not denying that Mahler was Bohemian, but you appear to have covered Bohemia twice.


Saphire

[Brahms]

Brahms

Can I draw your attention to the following section of my previous post:

Given that Mahler was born in Bohemia, doesn't that make him Czech? If so, why have you listed Mahler as your favourite Bohemian composer while nominating Janacek and Dvorak as your favourite Czeck composers? (I believe that Mahler's family soon moved to Moravia, which is still part of Cz).

It appears not to have been answered in the subsequent exchanges. It's a very simple question. I'm not denying that Mahler was Bohemian, but you appear to have covered Bohemia twice.


Saphire

In 1860 (the year Mahler was born), Bohemia was controlled by the Habsburg Monarchy, so at that time, technically, Bohemia was not Czech (although it is today). Then in 1867 it became part of the Austro-Hungarian empire.

In any case, for the purposes of this thread, I think it's most accurate to characterize Mahler as "Bohemian-Austrian" rather than Czech.

[Jack Kelso]

Incidentally, my preference order for German composers is: (1) Beethoven, (2) Schumann, (3) Brahms.

Saphire

Wagner ranks very highly (#5) in my personal pantheon of immortal composers. And while I respect those who place Wagner ahead of Brahms (yeah, Wagner was more influential), I harbor two serious reservations about Wagner's music; specifically:

1. Wagner composed in only one genre. While Brahms mastered perhaps a dozen genres, Wagner never achieved greatness outside of the opera genre.

2. Wagner had no clue about musical economy (conciseness). Wagner seldom gave any thought to concluding an opera until at least three or four hours had elapsed.

But Brahms and Wagner are largely noncomparable -- two towering geniuses with distinctly different styles and temperaments: Wagner composed only operas; and Brahms composed everything but opera. In this case, it's impossible to say that one immortal is "greater" than the other. But if I were forced to choose, I would certainly opt for Brahms.

Comparisons have also been made in regard to Schumann and Wagner, the former being the "Bach" of the Romantic Era and Wagner the "Handel".

Now that the great Wagner-wave of the 20th century has largely subsided and many previously neglected Schumann choral, chamber and orchestral works have been re-evaluated and recorded, most musicologists today would regard Schumann's influence to have been more style-pervasive than Wagner's---to a greater number of composers, such as Bruch, Brahms, Grieg, Lalo, Saint-Saens, Tschaikowsky (more in form), Stanford, Elgar, Mahler, Debussy, Pfitzner (also Wagner), Webern, Reger (also Brahms) and a host of others.

Clearly, Wagner's orchestration---more perhaps than his style---contributed to the development of Bruckner, Cornelius, Draeseke, Humperdinck, R. Strauss, Glasunov, Mahler, etc.

Swiss composer, musicologist, conductor and oboist Heinz Holliger says that "Schumann was the real revolutionary of the 19th century".

Yep....and he influenced Wagner as well.

Jack

[jbuck919]

Are the music historians and I the only ones for whom "Prophet Bird" spells out D-E-B-U-S-S-Y...?

Barking up the wrong tree, again, Jack. Debussy, along with his countrynan Ravel the last person to write great solo piano music, was sui generis and very self-consciously so. No matter what he wrote, no matter what he liked, he knew that he had to break from tradition to accomplish anything at all when art had put such a period on things in 1897 (the year Brahms died). And I have a sense that he must have known that every single pathway a composer would take from then on would be a dead end, as indeed it has turned out to be.

Vogel als Prophet is a beautiful and interesting exercise in chromaticism, but not, no matter what may be written down, an influence on Debussy. Schumann is one of the strangest of the great composers, all of whom have their oddities of course, so I don't know why I'm bothering with this. So much of his life was devoted to being buergerlich, a middle class jouurnalistic failed pianist whose great accomplishment was winning a wife. And then there is the insanity. Somehow, in between everything, hie managed to sit down and compose some of the greatest music there is. As with every great composer, we don't know how he did it; he just did.

[Jack Kelso]

Are the music historians and I the only ones for whom "Prophet Bird" spells out D-E-B-U-S-S-Y...?

Barking up the wrong tree, again, Jack. Debussy, along with his countrynan Ravel the last person to write great solo piano music, was sui generis and very self-consciously so. No matter what he wrote, no matter what he liked, he knew that he had to break from tradition to accomplish anything at all when art had put such a period on things in 1897 (the year Brahms died). And I have a sense that he must have known that every single pathway a composer would take from then on would be a dead end, as indeed it has turned out to be.

Vogel als Prophet is a beautiful and interesting exercise in chromaticism, but not, no matter what may be written down, an influence on Debussy. Schumann is one of the strangest of the great composers, all of whom have their oddities of course, so I don't know why I'm bothering with this. So much of his life was devoted to being buergerlich, a middle class jouurnalistic failed pianist whose great accomplishment was winning a wife. And then there is the insanity. Somehow, in between everything, hie managed to sit down and compose some of the greatest music there is. As with every great composer, we don't know how he did it; he just did.

John, if you think Debussy's music does not show any influence from Schumann, then you should read the critics more often. They get paid for correct analysis.

Jack

[Sapphire]

Jack, Jbuck, Brahms


Mark Twain: "I've heard that Wagner's music is better than it sounds."

Picking up on several strands above.

Wagner only wrote in one genre rather than many for Brahms (which thus makes him less credit-worthy).

I’ve seen this issue debated at length elsewhere.

(i) One counter-argument is that while Wagner's output was operatic, his influence was universal, eg symphonists like Bruckner, Mahler; Oratorios (Elgar), tone poems (Strauss), art songs (Wolf). Wagner is often rated the most influential composer, although I'm not saying I agree with that.

(ii) Another argument is so what if he did only write in one genre? Take the following simplified illustration. Two Composers A and B. A is a specialist who wrote say 10 masterpieces. B wrote in two separate genres and produced 5 masterpieces in each. Who is the greater composer on the simplifying premise that the general quality of all works is broadly comparable? Why get credit for diversity per se?

Brahms wrote brilliantly in most genres

(i) Some Brahms fans (myself included) prefer Brahms orchestral works to Brahms chamber. I like the dense texture sound displayed in his symphonies, piano and violin concertos, Tragic and Academic overtures, Requiem etc. There is so much smooth layering in these works that have some great counterpoint. Having said that, I'm not so keen on S2. But I have to admit there are several of the chamber works I like less. There are some very splendid works indeed like the piano and clarinet quintets, but I'm so keen on several of the string quartets (I find several of them rather bland).

(ii) It’s also been argued that Brahms wasn't the strongest melody maker. I can say I rather prefer Schubert, Beethoven, Mozart and Schumann, whose works were more lyrical and endearing to my ears. I have to say here that I do really love Schubert. I believe that, after Beethoven, Schumann had a very high regard for Schubert.

Schumann the great innovator

(i) I couldn't agree more with the strong favourable sentiments about Schumann. I arrived rather late with Schumann, but better late than never. I now have a good deal of what Schumann wrote. I love most of it and I agree it's very innovative. Just to mention one piece, his piano quintet Op. 44 was a big advance. Brahms seems to me to have followed it very closely with his Op. 34. And of course Schumann's work in the solo piano area is novel and of generally oustanding quality. Op. 17 Fantasie is a monument. One evening recently I let my CD player repeat it about 5 times. It's currently probably my favourite piece of all.

(ii) I agree with Jbuck that Schumann is a fascinating character. I’ve read a lot about him and Clara, and I must say I’m drawn close to them, and of course to their protégé Brahms. The only tiny area of possible disagreement with Jack is over this Schumann/Debussy issue. Despite what musicologists may say, I personally do not see much connection. But I’m not arguing, Jack, merely stating my perceptions here.

Debussy/Ravel next generation great piano composers

I’ve recently been adding quite significantly to my CD collection of their works because it had a number of gaps, and I’ve always felt somewhat exposed in expressing my scepticism when other folk rave about them. These additions aren't doing much for me. My latest acquisitions have been Ravel’s Piano Concerto in G maj and Daphnis et Chloe. It's listenable but not that memorable. I've placed it all in the “mediocre” section of my collection, along with everything else they wrote. How any of this can be compared with late Mozart or any of the greats of the 19th C baffles me completely. It's so much inferior IMO.


Saphire

[Jack Kelso]

(i) Some Brahms fans (myself included) prefer Brahms orchestral works to Brahms chamber. I like the dense texture sound displayed in his symphonies, piano and violin concertos, Tragic and Academic overtures, Requiem etc. There is so much smooth layering in these works that have some great counterpoint. Having said that, I'm not so keen on S2. But I have to admit there are several of the chamber works I like less. There are some very splendid works indeed like the piano and clarinet quintets, but I'm so keen on several of the string quartets (I find several of them rather bland).

(ii) It’s also been argued that Brahms wasn't the strongest melody maker. I can say I rather prefer Schubert, Beethoven, Mozart and Schumann, whose works were more lyrical and endearing to my ears. I have to say here that I do really love Schubert. I believe that, after Beethoven, Schumann had a very high regard for Schubert.

Schumann the great innovator

(i) I couldn't agree more with the strong favourable sentiments about Schumann. I arrived rather late with Schumann, but better late than never. I now have a good deal of what Schumann wrote. I love most of it and I agree it's very innovative. Just to mention one piece, his piano quintet Op. 44 was a big advance. Brahms seems to me to have followed it very closely with his Op. 34. And of course Schumann's work in the solo piano area is novel and of generally oustanding quality. Op. 17 Fantasie is a monument. One evening recently I let my CD player repeat it about 5 times. It's currently probably my favourite piece of all.

Debussy/Ravel next generation great piano composers

I’ve recently been adding quite significantly to my CD collection of their works because it had a number of gaps, and I’ve always felt somewhat exposed in expressing my scepticism when other folk rave about them. These additions aren't doing much for me. My latest acquisitions have been Ravel’s Piano Concerto in G maj and Daphnis et Chloe. It's listenable but not that memorable. I've placed it all in the “mediocre” section of my collection, along with everything else they wrote. How any of this can be compared with late Mozart or any of the greats of the 19th C baffles me completely. It's so much inferior IMO.


Saphire

Yes, I too prefer Brahms' orchestral works to his chamber music---but only generally speaking, as the 1st Piano Quartet, op. 25, the Piano Quintet, the 1st String Sextet and several others are all finely written, beautifully constructed and moving works, among my favorites of his. On the other hand, among the works for orchestra I find the serenades and the Double Concerto less consistently interesting.

I enjoy Debussy more than Ravel, although the latter's piano concerti (in G and for the left hand) have much feeling in them. Yet many of Ravel's works are attractively orchestrated but, for me, tend too much to the decorative side of expression, i.e. lacking in warmth. Sometimes the constant "Spanish touch" (an old passion of many French composers) gets to be too much.

Comparisons of Ravel with Mozart are not so impossible, since these are based not only on melodic, rhythmic or harmonic developments but also on questions of form. Like Haydn and Mozart, Ravel strove for a clear classicism and shorter forms in many of his concerti and chamber works.

Jack