Where can I learn about 'bests'?

[ShineyMcShineShine]

I wouldn't discount the guidebook I mentioned. It will take time to build up a core body of knowledge. As you get to know more music, you'll start to see for yourself what seems most promising to tackle next.

Yeah, I'll see if I can get the NPR book from the library. In the meantime, I found a pirated copy of Classical Music: The 50 Greatest Composers and Their 1,000 Greatest Works by Phil G. Goulding online, which looks useful. Anyone familiar with this title? Spoiler alert: #1 is Bach. #50 is Borodin.

[Karl Henning]

Well, I don't know. It might be useful to know they're all very much worth listening to, as it's not that large a group of works. The distribution of votes is usually a decent indicator of popularity, which often enough correlates with approachability too.

You have a point, and I should modify no earthly use to qualified use  0:)

[Karl Henning]

Yes, I concede that point. If you said the same about Haydn's symphonies, however, I'd have to disagree again. : )

You mean, you feel you must listen to all of "Papa's" symphonies at once?

I'm not saying you're wrong, but you're certainly ambitious! 

[Brahmsian]

Yeah, I'll see if I can get the NPR book from the library. In the meantime, I found a pirated copy of Classical Music: The 50 Greatest Composers and Their 1,000 Greatest Works by Phil G. Goulding online, which looks useful. Anyone familiar with this title?

Yes!  I got this when I was in my early stages in classical music discovery, and I found it a very helpful resource.  I still reference it from time to time. 

[Brahmsian]

As has been mentioned above, no earthly use asking GMG members, as you'll be told that practically every note ever written is the best.

  This is truth! 

[ShineyMcShineShine]

You mean, you feel you must listen to all of "Papa's" symphonies at once?

I'm not saying you're wrong, but you're certainly ambitious! 

No, I mean if someone were to say that any one of Papa's 100+ symphonies was as good a place to start as any other, I would have to say that's not very useful advice.

[Karl Henning]

No, I mean if someone were to say that any one of Papa's 100+ symphonies was as good a place to start as any other, I would have to say that's not very useful advice.

Ah.  Not useful, agreed.  But just where to tell a listener to start . . . I should want to know more about the listener.

(Heck, I should want to know many of the symphonies better . . . .)

[ShineyMcShineShine]

Since I've got you here, Karl, what are your top 10 chamber works for clarinet? I just recently heard Mozart's and Brahm's  clarinet quintets and liked them both, particularly the Mozart. His clarinet trio didn't really grab me, however.

[Karl Henning]

Since I've got you here, Karl, what are your top 10 chamber works for clarinet? I just recently heard Mozart's and Brahm's  clarinet quintets and liked them both, particularly the Mozart. His clarinet trio didn't really grab me, however.

Great question!  And I'm not sure I've been asked before . . . off the top of my head (and not duplicating the Mozart & Brahms quintets, which would of course otherwise appear):

Bartok, Contrasts
Beethoven, Septet, Op.20
Copland, Sextet
Messiaen, Quatuor pour la fin du temps
Mozart, Quintet for piano & winds, K.452
Nielsen, Wind Quintet
Prokofiev, Overture on Hebrew Themes
Ravel, Introduction & Allegro
Schoenberg, Wind Quintet (by far IMO the best recording I've heard is that conducted by Robt Craft)
Stravinsky, Berceuses du chat
Stravinsky, L'histoire du soldat (which one can find both with and without the narration/dramatization, and in a trio version cl/vn/pf)

Honorable mention (too big to be a chamber work?):
Stravinsky, Symphonies d'instruments à vent

[Jo498]

For more clarinet pieces heck out the other Brahms clarinet pieces (trio and two sonatas) as well as Weber's clarinet quintet (and maybe Reger's although this one not too everyone's taste, despite being accessible for Regerian standards).
Also Schubert's octet and the three woodwind serenades by Mozart (K 375, 388, 361) with prominent clarinet parts.

[ShineyMcShineShine]

Thanks Karl and Jo498. Of those I've only heard the Mozart K.452 and some of the Brahms, so that list will keep me busy. What do you think of Saint-Saens' three sonatas for woodwinds? I have them on a disc by the Nash Ensemble and have not been impressed, so I was surprised when I learned they are considered major works. For example, the Goulding book I mentioned above includes them among his most important works.

[Karl Henning]

Well, my response is limited, and possibly not of much use    While I've become something of a fan of Saint-Saëns in the last 15 years or so (the concertante works and the "Organ" Symphony, especially), and I do have that Nash Ensemble disc, I have either not looked into those pieces, or they've not left an impression.  Back when I was a clarinet student at Wooster, I bought a copy of the Clarinet Sonata;  this is not binding, but as I looked it over, I did not find myself greatly motivated to learn and perform the piece.  So I get that there are enthusiasts for the pieces.  I cannot really speak to them.

[Jo498]

I have the Saint-Saens clarinet sonata on disc and I must have listened to it but I do not remember the piece. There are not so many woodwind sonatas by composers as well known a Saint-Saens so they are certainly respected and maybe played more frequently than e.g. a violin sonata of similar quality.

If you like Brahms' clarinet trio, there are some trio pieces by Schumann and Bruch with clarinet, viola, piano. There is also a nice romantic double concerto by Bruch for clarinet and viola. Also try to find the trio by Zemlinsky (and early work, clearly modelled after Brahms) and a quartet by some Walter Rabl (also very Brahms-like)

[North Star]

And there's also Poulenc's Clarinet Sonata

https://www.youtube.com/v/RMb_F9GsG8Q

[(poco) Sforzando]

Again, I think we're veering off from what the OP originally asked, which was not an in-depth survey of clarinet chamber music but rather to find out "the composers and works that are generally agreed upon as most important." Nobody is going to "generally agree" that the clarinet music of Saint-Saens, Poulenc, Bruch, Zemlinsky, or Walter Rabl is core repertoire for someone looking to answer this question. I don't know most of those particular works myself, and I've been involved with classical music for 55 years. The OP declares his surprise that S-S's woodwind chamber works are considered major works; I would share that surprise myself. I know I played the S-S sonata with a clarinetist once, and I found it instantly forgettable (I seem to be the third person here who has had this same reaction). If I had to nominate the clarinet chamber works "that are generally agreed upon as most important," they would be two: the Mozart and the Brahms Quintets.

I previewed that Goulding book on Amazon and I didn't like its tone; Goulding's system of rankings, with his Starter Kits, Top Tens, etc., seems heavy-handed and extremely pompous. I gave the OP a recommendation for a book I consider informative, judicious, and unpretentious. (Greatest limitations: the lack of information on early and modern music. Libbey pretty much starts with Bach and ends with early Stravinsky and Ravel, though Alban Berg gets a mention.) If I would supplement that book, I would add a good survey of music history. When I was young, I found Carter Harman's "Popular History of Music" very helpful. Paul Griffiths's "Concise History of Western Music" is also very good, as is "A History of Art and Music" by Kerman and Janson.

[Karl Henning]

In my defense, I was asked 

[(poco) Sforzando]

In my defense, I was asked 

I know. That's why I emphasized the word "originally." Perhaps the OP has to be clear in his mind what he wants too. 

[ShineyMcShineShine]

Yes, I am responsible for any veering off topic.

It seems then that the writer of the notes to the Nash Ensemble CD did indeed exaggerate when she wrote of his three woodwind sonatas, "Their importance in the woodwind repertoire cannot be exaggerated".

I think the best approach--and the one I plan to take--to such books and lists is to compare them to see where they agree, rather than taking any one source as authoritative.

[ShineyMcShineShine]

I know. That's why I emphasized the word "originally." Perhaps the OP has to be clear in his mind what he wants too. 

Oh, come now: surely you're not taking me to task for going off topic. I may not be a veteran here, but I've read enough threads to know that digression is the rule, not the exception. 

[Karl Henning]

It seems then that the writer of the notes to the Nash Ensemble CD did indeed exaggerate when she wrote of his three woodwind sonatas, "Their importance in the woodwind repertoire cannot be exaggerated".

For the record: yes, I consider that an exaggeration