Your Top 10 Favorite Composers

[Florestan]

I do feel that Berlioz and Rakhmaninov ought to be on the list, but that would just mean extending the list to twelve. And I'm sure that nobody wants to see that happen.  0:)

If there were a thread about top 100 favorite composers I would sleep well over it. 

[Karl Henning]

I do feel that Berlioz and Rakhmaninov ought to be on the list, but that would just mean extending the list to twelve. And I'm sure that nobody wants to see that happen.  0:)

Agreed, both that they ought to be on the list, and that there's no one presently on the list who should be displaced 

[some guy]

We seem to have veered a bit from "favorite."

Not entirely sure where we have veered to, but it's somewhere in the vicinity of "great" or "important."

Sure, one's favorites might be also on some list of "greats" or "important people." But that's as may be, no?

What possible matter if they are or are not? They're still favorites, right?

Michèle Bokanowski
Ludger Brümmer
Hector Berlioz
Beatriz Ferreyra
Luc Ferrari
Carl Nielsen
Serge Prokofiev
Otomo Yoshihide
eRikm
Andrea Neumann

Hmmmm. Nope. Ten is definitely a silly number. Nowhere near to being close.

Heigh ho.

[amw]

Slight revision:

1. Beethoven
...
3. Schumann
...
...
...
...
8. Schubert
...
10. Bartók
11. Brahms
...
...
14. Bach
...
16. Mozart
17. Haydn
...
19. Chopin
...
...
...
22. Dvořák
23 onwards: the rest

Lifetime influence, this still stands.

Using favourites to mean "current, temporary obsessions" as many on this thread do I would have to go
1. Brahms [represented primarily by the piano works Op. 116-119, the chamber music, and Symphony No. 3]
2. Beethoven [represented primarily by the piano sonatas and concertos, occasional symphonies]
3. Bach [represented primarily by certain harpsichord works: Partitas, Inventions, Toccatas, Italian Concerto/French Overture]
-------------
4. Mozart [represented primarily by the string quintets and quartets]
5. Schumann [represented primarily by Kreisleriana, Davidsbündlertänze, Carnaval and the Fantasie]
6. Nielsen [represented primarily by the symphonies and the Chaconne]
7. Debussy [represented exclusively by the Preludes, Etudes and Images]
8. Chopin [represented primarily by the Ballades, Sonata No. 3, Scherzi and Polonaise-Fantaisie]
9. Fauré [represented primarily by the Barcarolles, piano quartets and violin sonatas]
and that's all I can fill out before the list becomes arbitrary. I don't know why, but for the last few months my musical tastes have become even more restricted. I used to be super enthusiastic about new music too, and I still enjoy it a lot when I do listen, but have the desire to do so very rarely.

[Brian]

for the last few months my musical tastes have become even more restricted. I used to be super enthusiastic about new music too, and I still enjoy it a lot when I do listen, but have the desire to do so very rarely.

Without wanting to scare you: as I hit my mid-twenties I definitely notice a drop in the results of obscure/new music explorations, and am mildly panicked over whether tastes start to "gel" or firm up at a certain age. Like, back in college, I checked half the CPO and Naxos catalogues out of the library and probably spammed GMG about how great all our favorite obscure composers are (let's pick on Joly Braga Santos). But now, half the time I listen to that stuff again, or half the time I try whatever weird new thing pops up on NML, or all the time in the case of Braga Santos, it makes me think "man I could be listening to Brahms right now." And it's much more frequent that my brain wants its "comfort food" music - the musical version of craving a toasty sandwich or mac 'n' cheese instead of some bold/clever new preparation. Which gives me a bit of "bad listener" guilt, but can you really fight that?

Not sure what happened, or why, or if aging/maturity/brain-wiring is really to blame, but...maybe?

[Karl Henning]

Well, if you want to listen to Brahms, don't put a Braga Santos disc in! 

[North Star]

If Brahms is comfort food, it's a perfectly seared beef tenderloin.

[Madiel]

Without wanting to scare you: as I hit my mid-twenties I definitely notice a drop in the results of obscure/new music explorations, and am mildly panicked over whether tastes start to "gel" or firm up at a certain age.

Meh. I'm probably more musically curious in the last 5 years than I've ever been.

My tastes have firmed up, in that I know what I'm looking for. The thing is, I'm increasingly curious about where I might find it.

[Brian]

Meh. I'm probably more musically curious in the last 5 years than I've ever been.

My tastes have firmed up, in that I know what I'm looking for. The thing is, I'm increasingly curious about where I might find it.

Now that's an interesting way of looking at it! Thank you.

[Jaakko Keskinen]

It may have been due to some unfortunate experiences I've had but my taste in music has narrowed down very much and I see myself returning to same pieces over and over again. Interestingly, absolutely music, with nothing literature-related topics, has slipped more and more away from my attention but program music still keeps me often interested. There are exceptions of course in absolute music and I did prefer program music to absolute one even before but that fact has increased very much during the last couple of years.

[nathanb]

The more and more I evolve, the harder these ultimate lists become. Like, if I looked at only the last year and a half or so, Beethoven would have no place in the list. But all the same, I'd feel...dirty...

[71 dB]

The more and more I evolve, the harder these ultimate lists become.

I'm not much of a list maker anymore. I feel they are pointless and tell more about ourself than the composers listed. Are the lists we make reasonable?

For example: Why is J. S. Bach the only baroque composer making it to these lists if even him? Were baroque composers that much crappier than say romantic composers? Is Ravel really better than Rameau? Is Bolero better than Dardanus Suite? Why doesn't M.A. Charpenter or Buxtehude make it to our top 10 lists? I am not saying these composers particular deserve being on the list. I mean there are some strange biases in classical music and we don't even realise it. Is Haydn really superior to all composer before J. S. Bach? Really? You may say this a matter of taste, but why do you like Haydn more than every composer before Bach? Can you say you have never enjoyed Corelli or Handel as much as Haydn? Does the cultural environment we live in direct us to like some composer more than others? Are we encouraged to like Haydn more than Dittersdorf? I think we are.

[North Star]

[These lists] tell more about ourself than the composers listed. Are the lists we make reasonable?

So you would like to see an objective ranking of all the greatest composers? I don't think that degree of objectivity is possible to achieve in as subjective a field as culture.

Is Bolero better than Dardanus Suite?

You know, Ravel did write other pieces, too.

I mean there are some strange biases in classical music and we don't even realise it.

Certainly.

Is Haydn really superior to all composer before J. S. Bach? Really? You may say this a matter of taste, but why do you like Haydn more than every composer before Bach? Can you say you have never enjoyed Corelli or Handel as much as Haydn?

Why pick Haydn and Baroque composers (especially Baroque composers who are not Zelenka or Vivaldi!  ), and not some Renaissance composers? You could come up with a very long list of them and be able to claim quite plausible that, using suitable parameters for the comparison, they are all superior to Haydn, and to Dittersdorf.

Does the cultural environment we live in direct us to like some composer more than others? Are we encouraged to like Haydn more than Dittersdorf? I think we are.

Much the same way the cultural environment we live in directs us to, apart from ignoring both, to prefer Renoir over Cabanel.

[Autumn Leaves]

Don't think I contributed a list to this thread - in no particular order:

Tchaikovsky
Sibelius
Shostakovich
Vaughan Williams
Chopin
Mendelssohn
Villa-Lobos
Mahler
Debussy
Brahms

[amw]

Without wanting to scare you: as I hit my mid-twenties I definitely notice a drop in the results of obscure/new music explorations, and am mildly panicked over whether tastes start to "gel" or firm up at a certain age. Like, back in college, I checked half the CPO and Naxos catalogues out of the library and probably spammed GMG about how great all our favorite obscure composers are (let's pick on Joly Braga Santos). But now, half the time I listen to that stuff again, or half the time I try whatever weird new thing pops up on NML, or all the time in the case of Braga Santos, it makes me think "man I could be listening to Brahms right now." And it's much more frequent that my brain wants its "comfort food" music - the musical version of craving a toasty sandwich or mac 'n' cheese instead of some bold/clever new preparation. Which gives me a bit of "bad listener" guilt, but can you really fight that?

Not sure what happened, or why, or if aging/maturity/brain-wiring is really to blame, but...maybe?

Haha, I mean the interesting thing is that since April I've even stopped listening to a lot of the works/composers I listed as current obsessions, (where listening meant basically comparing versions and looking for the best ones). Which means that 95% of the time recently music has been just something I put on in the background. I'm not at this point going to say "my musical tastes r over omg" but clearly I'm just at a particular point in my life at which I don't "need" music as much right now.

Presumably it'll come back, eventually. I think life events play a definite role, though—more than any maturation. For the past few years I'd developed a greater interest in exploration, wider definitions of acceptable taste and a more discriminatory understanding of quality. (This doesn't include just exploration of new works.) I have a more defined taste, and a better idea of what to look for to satisfy it. I assume that's the growing older thing, and will continue, underneath whatever emotional thing has taken me away from music at the moment. Hard to say though.

[71 dB]

So you would like to see an objective ranking of all the greatest composers?

No. How can such ranking even exist? There are no objective methods to rank art to my knowledge.

I don't think that degree of objectivity is possible to achieve in as subjective a field as culture.

Exactly.

You know, Ravel did write other pieces, too.

Sure, many. So did Rameau. What are the works that put Ravel above Rameau? Piano Concerto in G Major? If so, would we appreciate it as much as we do had Ravel not composed Bolero?

Why pick Haydn and Baroque composers (especially Baroque composers who are not Zelenka or Vivaldi!  ), and not some Renaissance composers?

I picked Haydn because his one of those composer on almost everyne's list. Baroque composers instead of Renaissance composers because of personal preferences. Monteverdi, Palestrina, etc. could have been mentioned, of course.
Why not Zelenka and Vivaldi? They are too far in the end of alphabets. 
I needed only a few names to make my point. No need to go from A to Z.

You could come up with a very long list of them and be able to claim quite plausible that, using suitable parameters for the comparison, they are all superior to Haydn, and to Dittersdorf.

Perhaps. However, I don't make much lists these days.

Much the same way the cultural environment we live in directs us to, apart from ignoring both, to prefer Renoir over Cabanel.

My point is these lists tell mostly about our cultural environment. The problem here is that we tend to take these lists as quasi-objective ranks of composers rather than what they really are. 

[North Star]

No. How can such ranking even exist? There are no objective methods to rank art to my knowledge.

There are some (e.g. influence), but they have their limits, as e.g. circumstances affect influence, and in any case, there's little point in trying to measure who was more influential, Beethoven or Haydn, in order to name one of the two 'better' on account of that.

Sure, many. So did Rameau. What are the works that put Ravel above Rameau? Piano Concerto in G Major? If so, would we appreciate it as much as we do had Ravel not composed Bolero?

I'm not going to say which pieces "put Ravel above Rameau", but I suggest you listen to both Piano Concertos, the Piano Trio, L'Enfant et les Sortilèges, the songs, Miroirs, the String Quartet, Gaspard, Violin Sonata, Sonata for Violin & Cello, and Introduction et Allegro for harp, flute, clarinet & string quartet. Bolero is a delightful piece too, but your question is pretty much equal to asking whether we would appreciate Beethoven's Missa Solemnis, Ninth Symphony, the late Quartets and Piano Sonatas, had he not composed Für Elise.

I picked Haydn because his one of those composer on almost everyne's list. Baroque composers instead of Renaissance composers because of personal preferences.

That underlined bit might be significant.

My point is these lists tell mostly about our cultural environment. The problem here is that we tend to take these lists as quasi-objective ranks of composers rather than what they really are.

No, these lists tell mostly about our personal preferences. If that means that 17th century Baroque isn't represented all that extensively, that doesn't necessarily mean the cultural environment is biased against it more strongly than it is against other bygone eras.

[chadfeldheimer]

So you would like to see an objective ranking of all the greatest composers? I don't think that degree of objectivity is possible to achieve in as subjective a field as culture.

So you think rating music or composers is 100% subjective and not objectifiable at all? I see that in a less distinct/binary way. A 100% objective ranking of the greatest composers also imo is not possible (of course), but at least I think there are criteria that would allow objectifying such kind of ranking at least to some degree. I'm thinking about criteria like influence on later generations of composers or inventions of compositional techniques. If there weren't such criteria, disciplinces like musicology wouldn't be worth a penny and a symphony of farts (forgot which member brought this one) or the latest Britney Spears album had the same musical value as say "Le Sacre Du Printemps" or "Die Winterreise". Musicology isn't of course no exact discipline like mathematics or physics, but even medicine is not.

[chadfeldheimer]

There are some (e.g. influence), but they have their limits, as e.g. circumstances affect influence, and in any case, there's little point in trying to measure who was more influential, Beethoven or Haydn, in order to name one of the two 'better' on account of that.

Didn't see that before posting my last post. I'm glad you see things more differentiated, than I first thought you would.

[71 dB]

Buxtehude had huge influence on Bach and Handel. C.P.E. Bach had huge infuence on Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven. Wagner is said to be the most influencial composer ever. Do we look at the influence of all composers equally? What does the level of influence to have with how much we enjoy the music? I don't think J. S. Bach was as influencial as his music is enjoayable.

No, these lists tell mostly about our personal preferences. If that means that 17th century Baroque isn't represented all that extensively, that doesn't necessarily mean the cultural environment is biased against it more strongly than it is against other bygone eras.

How do you define "bygone"? Haydn isn't "bygone" just yet, but Zelenka definitely is? Never realised the eras have an expiration date.

My taste is just as "biased" as yours. What is the point of comparing those two? These lists tell us how rebellious we are against the cultural influencies. So the title of this thread should be "How rebellious your taste is?"