Composers b. 1900-1934 listening frequency

[James]

Which 5 composers born between 1900-1934 (but are now deceased) do you listen to most often from this list?

(not comprehensive, but try your best to pick the 5 you listen to most often from this particular list)

[RebLem]

Shostakovich, Copland, Britten, Bernstein, Barber, in that order.

[piston]

Five votes on this poll
Shostakovich, Messiaen, Britten, Schnittke, Copland.

[Chalkperson]

Shostakovich, Schnittke, Feldman, Nono, and Berio...

[MaestroDJS]

To paraphrase Mark Twain in The Innocents Abroad: You mean to tell us that — that they — are, are they all — dead?

[jbuck919]

Shostakovich, someone else, someone else, someone else, and someone else.

[piston]

Shostakovich, someone else, someone else, someone else, and someone else.

Not even Jean Françaix?!!!

[piston]

another modern/contemporary dead Frenchman I have come to appreciate, especially for his numerous concertos, his Andre Jolivet.

[jbuck919]

Shostakovich, someone else, someone else, someone else, and someone else.

Not even Jean Françaix?!!!

This is going to sound idiosyncratic (but when did I ever let that stop me?) but IMO two composers do not belong on the list with the others. All of those composers save two are post-modern either by direct temperament or reaction. Shostakovich is a continuity with the Russian flavor of modernism and belongs (also in achievement) with Prokofiev, Bartok, and Stravinsky. And Kurt Weill's achievement was not primarily in the area of classical music.

[piston]

Bartok, and Stravinsky

I don't think a poll separating living and dead contemporary music composers is going to be satisrfactory. Why is Bartok "modern" and Carter "contemporary"? Why is Stravinsky "modern" and Reich "contemporary"? And what to do with all the non-cutting edge people, including Shostakovich, who far outweigh, numerically speaking, the [presumed] cutting edge composers such as Carter?

What a mess! I know that there exists a few sites trying to make sense of all of these trends and several idiosyncretic "great" composers. But what to do with a Bartok who died nearly 65 years ago? To many classical music lovers he's still contemporary!

[Lance]

For me, regarding deceased 20th century composers:

Copland
Shostakovich
Barber
Bernstein
Schnittke [just a few items, including the Beethoven Violin Concerto cadenza and Suite in the Olden Style]

... and in that particular order. I would have included Virgil Thomson though his repertoire is not that large but what is there is quite stunning.

[jbuck919]

Bartok, and Stravinsky

I don't think a poll separating living and dead contemporary music composers is going to be satisrfactory. Why is Bartok "modern" and Carter "contemporary"? Why is Stravinsky "modern" and Reich "contemporary"? And what to do with all the non-cutting edge people, including Shostakovich, who far outweigh, numerically speaking, the [presumed] cutting edge composers such as Carter?

What a mess! I know that there exists a few sites trying to make sense of all of these trends and several idiosyncretic "great" composers. But what to do with a Bartok who died nearly 65 years ago? To many classical music lovers he's still contemporary!

It's not as big a problem as one might think. (The fact that listeners of a certain grade of experience consider everything composed after 1900 "contemporary" is not relevant.) We might disagree on the label, but there is a pretty definite dividing point between modernism, which ends around 1950, and post-modernism. The paucity of our vocabulary when it comes to dealing with newness is a barrier, but this distinction is more or less easily observed. There is one modern composers who lived well past the chronological "wall" (Stravinsky) and another who, as I have pointed out, was a bit more out of time (Shostakovich). One way of gauging that we are dealing with a specific period is that, like all earlier periods, history has more or less made its judgments about who its abiding masters were. We're not likely to revise the canon of great composers who died before 1950, or 1975 if you must.

[piston]

Well, it has been revised, John. Bartok was not popular before his death. So, here's a "modern" composer neglected during the "modern" period who gained tremendous appeal some fifteen to twenty years after he died, during the "contemporary" period. I also remember when Shostakovich (beyond your "wall") was not as popular, recording wise, as Prokofiev (before your "wall"). So what do you say? Prokofiev is "modern" and Shostakovich is "contemporary"? That does not work with me.....

[Chalkperson]

Schnittke [just a few items, including the Beethoven Violin Concerto cadenza and Suite in the Olden Style.

You amended your Thread...So, was I correct that it was that piece you are going to play in your Vladimir Spivakov Tribute...

[jbuck919]

Well, it has been revised, John. Bartok was not popular before his death. So, here's a "modern" composer neglected during the "modern" period who gained tremendous appeal some fifteen to twenty years after he died, during the "contemporary" period. I also remember when Shostakovich (beyond your "wall") was not as popular, recording wise, as Prokofiev (before your "wall"). So what do you say? Prokofiev is "modern" and Shostakovich is "contemporary"? That does not work with me.....

You're making me be repetitious about Shostakovich. I'm saying that we can't judge him strictly by chronology. He could have been shifted left on the time line by 25 years and still have composed essentially the same music. (I am saying not that he was old-fashioned, but that he changed the times to his liking.)

And Bach was not popular for 100 years after his death. That was not my criterion. Do you think that today we are going to add anybody to the list (of moderns, I mean)? Not very likely. But though some people here have made up their minds about a few of the post-moderns, the book on them is still pretty open, and that goes double for any living composers.

[Ken]

Tippett, Shostakovich, Lutoslawski, Stockhausen, and Schnittke, though I don't see an option for William Walton.

[Edited - I originally chose 'Messiaen' and not 'Shostakovich', because for whatever reason I failed to notice him when I first submitted my ballot! Good thing I soon realized my mistake...]

[val]

Not easy to say. The ones I most love are Ligeti, Berio, Xenakis, Britten, Nono, Lutoslawski.

[stenka razin]

Copand, Shostakovich, Barber, Britten and Bernstein.

[James]

"The thing is, there are still many composers who continue to write one symphony after another, oblivious of the innovations of the 20th century and the opening up of radically new techniques. They are once again writing series of string quartets, they follow the traditional patterns for orchestral scoring, write their solo concerti, their little operas and Lieder, their orchestra works in four movements, and so on. You'll notice this expressly reactionary tendency everywhere, and it currently calls itself postmodern. It's a truly revolting term, for there is no such thing as modern, postmodern, or for that sake, premodern. For a creative individual, every day is given to new discoveries, new questions and new inventions." -Karlheinz Stockhausen, November 8th, 1991

[Jared]

two days ago, I listened to some Takemitsu...

it really was awful...

of the music I have heard from this category, I'm afraid I'm just not a fan...

sorry...

[Chalkperson]

two days ago, I listened to some Takemitsu...

it really was awful...

Actually, no...you just did not like it...

[James]

A lot Shostakovich's music has a lean & stringy quality to it that I find off putting... though I love his 1st Violin Concerto, thats a great work. From this list (and I've heard plenty of things from all the names)....Ligeti (the Etudes! and many others) is the big beast I have listened to the most here. Stockhausen (Klavierstucke and others, and especially in recent years the later works from primarily Licht & Klang). Messiaen (Catalogue Oiseaux). Tippett (Piano Concerto! especially the beautiful multi-stranded lyrical polyphony of the 1st mvt). And down thru the years I've spent quite a bit of time listening to the highly original polyphonic/polyrhythmic studies of Nancarrow....

[Jared]

two days ago, I listened to some Takemitsu...

it really was awful...

Actually, no...you just did not like it...

OK, I didn't like it in such a way that it won't ever grace my CD player again..

and that's rich coming from you, who probably 'bashes' more composers, conductors and performances than every other forum member put together..

[jbuck919]

and that's rich coming from you, who probably 'bashes' more composers, conductors and performances than every other forum member put together..

I resent that remark!

[Chalkperson]

and that's rich coming from you, who probably 'bashes' more composers, conductors and performances than every other forum member put together..

I resent that remark!

Go to the Archives, look up John's posts from about three years ago, i'm tame by comparison...I only knock Brahms, Schumann, Elgar, Vaughan-Wiliams, Rattle, Gardiner, Heifitz, Horowitz, Cortot, Rubinstein, Feidler, Toscanini, Bernstein etc, it's not like they are Big Names...besides it injects a little humor otherwise CMG would be sooo boring...

PS I don't like Takematsu either, but, I have all his works on disc and I have listened to it all, I just choose to not hear it again, with Rattie and Gardiner I have wasted enough money to know to avoid them like the plague, they are only The Interpreter's anyway...don't forget that I listen to "Music" that I don't like all the time, as opposed to "Recordings" that I know I probably won't like, you can't knock something you have not heard...

[Corlyss_D]

I think John meant to say, "I resemble that remark!"

[lmpower]

I again find myself largely in agreement with the other members, except that I didn't pick Copland. Can someone please explain to me what I have been missing all these years. I admit that I am not extremely familiar with all his music.

[jbuck919]

I again find myself largely in agreement with the other members, except that I didn't pick Copland. Can someone please explain to me what I have been missing all these years. I admit that I am not extremely familiar with all his music.

Shall I go first?