Whose music do you prefer: Handel's or Vivaldi's?

Started by Mark, March 14, 2008, 04:38:46 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Given the choice, whose music would you rather hear?

Handel's
28 (45.9%)
Vivaldi's
28 (45.9%)
Neither
5 (8.2%)

Total Members Voted: 37

Mark

Quote from: erato on March 18, 2008, 05:17:52 AM
If you limit yourself to the LATE Baroque; there's a large batch of early baroque composers scrambling to get into this list.

Okay. Then propose your Trinity.

The new erato

#61
Bach, Handel and Monteverdi.

Edit: I really also would like to have Purcell, Rameau and Schutz on the list.

The 6 absolutely essential Baroque composers to me.

Josquin des Prez

#62
Quote from: lukeottevanger on March 18, 2008, 03:42:21 AM
I think I'd agree with this, especially the first three (though Monteverdi seems to be a different case, historically, perhaps); I don't know much Zelenka so can't really comment. And how about Couperin? Where do we fit him and his spectacular keyboard imagination in? I'd love to put Purcell in - at his best (Fantasias  :o :o 8) 8) )he is one of the very finest composers of any era, certainly leagues above Vivaldi (IMO  ;D ), but unfortunately there isn't enough of him to really justify that.

Yes, both Couperin and Purcell should be on the list, and Buxtehude as well. Forgot about him. The Baroque era is much broader then just Bach, Handel and Vivaldi!

You really must try the music of Zelenka. His trios sonatas are among the absolute best of their kind and his late masses are second only to those of Bach.

lukeottevanger

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on March 18, 2008, 07:29:46 AM
You really must try the music of Zelenka. His trios sonatas are among the absolute best of their kind and his late masses are second only to those of Bach.

I have tried him - and I'm impressed. But I haven't heard enough.  :)

Guido

Purcells music for Viols! So beautiful - he may be my favourite Baroque composer after Bach.
Geologist.

The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away

lukeottevanger

Quote from: Guido on March 19, 2008, 08:17:56 AM
Purcells music for Viols! So beautiful - he may be my favourite Baroque composer after Bach.

Absolutely! I've heard them compared (by e.g. Harrison Birtwistle) to the late Beethoven quartets and there's something to that. Before the nay-sayers get in a flap, I think this is to do with the 'aura' that the music exudes - an aura of rarified, condensed and cultivated quality etc. There aren't too many other pieces in this particular category - Art of Fugue and Musical Offering also fit, of course. It's not the same as saying that the Purcell pieces are as good as the Beethoven or the Bach, but they are not too far behind.

Expresso


Currently i prefer Vivaldi for orchestral music and Handel for vocal music.

But we don't really have as much Vivaldi operas recorded. From the few i've heard (Orlando, Tito) they're quite good.

Mark G. Simon

Quote from: Guido on March 19, 2008, 08:17:56 AM
Purcells music for Viols! So beautiful - he may be my favourite Baroque composer after Bach.

Boy, it's been ages since I've listened to these. I was totally in love with them during my college years. I recall some very bold modulations. I still have a recording of Elliott Carter's brass quintet arrangement of the "Fantasy on one note".


The new erato

Quote from: Mark G. Simon on March 22, 2008, 08:46:21 AM
Boy, it's been ages since I've listened to these. I was totally in love with them during my college years. I recall some very bold modulations. I still have a recording of Elliott Carter's brass quintet arrangement of the "Fantasy on one note".


I like them as well, but have alwyas found H Lawes suites even more challenging and interesting.

I always think of this set as the late Beethoven of viol writing:


quintett op.57

Quote from: Don on March 14, 2008, 08:16:19 AM
Same here, and I gave away the Vivaldi discs/sets that I did have.
you'll remain ignorant about his music

Josquin des Prez


MN Dave

Based on what I've heard (well, what else could I base it on?), I'll take Vivaldi.

quintett op.57

My choice goes to Händel, especially for the Concerti Grossi

MN Dave

Quote from: quintett op.57 on March 26, 2008, 09:56:18 AM
My choice goes to Händel, especially for the Concerti Grossi

See? I haven't heard those yet. Just the other usual suspects.

jowcol

Okay-- there doesn't seem to be a Vivaldi thread (??) -- so I may weigh in on this late..  I've just discovered his Cello concerti, and I'm REALLY enjoying them!  I was always pretty lukewarm about most of the 4 Seasons, and always LOVED el Estro Harmonico.  His arrangement of La Folia is fantastic-- it blows away the Corelli version.  (BTW-- if you like different variations of La Folia, you need to check out the site at http://www.folia.tk/.  It lists hundreds of versions with some sound bites.  The one with sitar and the industrial ones are a scream.) Anyway, I think the Vivaldi "formula" works even better with a cello in the lead and not violins.  The lead  stands our from the massed strings better, and this, IMO, an outstanding body of work.



I'd have to take Vivaldi over Handel if I HAD to choose, despite the fact that Vivaldi was what I'd call a "groove" composer who didn't have the greatest breadth of style.  (I'm being generous here.  There  there are those that say he wrote the same concerto 600 times! )  There is a rhythmic vitality to his work that is hard for me to dismiss, and his gift with melody is strong.   I'm also more biased towards the instrumental work-- I won't even pretend to weigh in on the choral works.

I guess I'd also be favoring Vivaldi because of the Bach connection.  I love Bach's concerto for 4 Harpsichords after Vivaldi....

wjp
"If it sounds good, it is good."
Duke Ellington

Bulldog

Quote from: quintett op.57 on March 26, 2008, 04:59:51 AM
you'll remain ignorant about his music

Not so.  I listened to my Vivaldi collection many times before deciding to give it to sources that might appreciate the music more than I.