GMG Classical Music Forum

Without wishing to start a ridiculous 'war' a la The Corkster in his infamous 'Because I like Handel he's automatically better than Bach' thread of recent times, I'd be interested to know whether Baroque lovers here have a preference for either Handel or Vivaldi.

Personally, I find Vivaldi's music very pretty, and sometimes quite exciting. But I doubt whether I could listen to it for as long as I could that of Handel. Handel's music really switches me on to a period which, broadly speaking, holds little appeal for me most of the time. I hear his wonderful choral compositions, or his beautifully crafted concerti, and I could happily play nothing else all day. Whereas with Vivaldi, the length of one CD is usually quite enough.

Why this should be I've no idea. I don't claim to have heard a wealth of material by either composer. All I know is that, of what I've heard, Handel 'speaks' to me far more vividly than Vivaldi.

How about you?

Both composers speak for me in equal tones. I find that I can listen as long or short to both composers, without fatigue.
Both vocally and instrumental, they are more than a match for each other. My two cents anyway. :)

No question of War, since at the outset you speak of preference, Mark! (Shrewd doing of words, that.)

I find it sort of a toss-up, but I will 'vote with my ears', that is, I vote by answering the question, Which composer's music have I most recently and/or most often deliberately popped into the player?

And the 'winner' is: Il prete rosso

I don't have much of either (2 Vivaldi CDs and Handels Messiah, Concerti Grossi, Water Music), but I prefer Handel by a country mile and a half!

Quote from: springrite on March 14, 2008, 04:53:44 AM
I don't have much of either (2 Vivaldi CDs and Handels Messiah, Concerti Grossi, Water Music), but I prefer Handel by a country mile and a half!

That's rather a lot of miles Paul! ;D

Quote from: karlhenning on March 14, 2008, 04:52:43 AM
No question of War, since at the outset you speak of preference, Mark! (Shrewd doing of words, that.)

I find it sort of a toss-up, but I will 'vote with my ears', that is, I vote by answering the question, Which composer's music have I most recently and/or most often deliberately popped into the player?

And the 'winner' is: Il prete rosso

I read that he coloured his hair with hennep...... :)

So, the Harmonious Blacksmith and the Red Priest currently neck and neck. Interesting ...

I have very little of both composer's music.  I prefer Vivaldi.

One of the works which swung it for me towards the Handel camp is his breathtaking 'Carmelite Vespers'. The opening 'Dixit Dominus', with its criss-crossing vocal work and compelling energy, made a much greater impression on me than did Vivaldi's 'Gloria'. Many of Handel's concerti, too, sound as though more time was invested in them. Perhaps I'm less impressed by Vivaldi's outings in this genre because I know of his famous boast that he could write such works as fast as a copyist could take them down.

Quote from: Mark on March 14, 2008, 05:04:13 AM
One of the works which swung it for me towards the Handel camp is his breathtaking 'Carmelite Vespers'.

This is why I love threads like this: I learn to my regret, that such a work has been entirely off my radar, and now I know to seek to amend that!

Quote from: Mark on March 14, 2008, 05:04:13 AM
One of the works which swung it for me towards the Handel camp is his breathtaking 'Carmelite Vespers'. The opening 'Dixit Dominus', with its criss-crossing vocal work and compelling energy, made a much greater impression on me than did Vivaldi's 'Gloria'.

Are you sure Handel composed that work himself?

Quote from: Mark on March 14, 2008, 05:04:13 AM
Many of Handel's concerti, too, sound as though more time was invested in them. Perhaps I'm less impressed by Vivaldi's outings in this genre because I know of his famous boast that he could write such works as fast as a copyist could take them down.

Well, here I know he did not compose all of them himself, for sure. Just ask Georg Muffat.

Quote from: springrite on March 14, 2008, 05:09:57 AM
Are you sure Handel composed that work himself?

The 'Carmelite Vespers'? I've no idea. I have a version on Virgin which has parts of the liturgy interpolated to give the work greater context. That's all I know.

QuoteWell, here I know he did not compose all of them himself, for sure. Just ask Georg Muffat.

You mean Vivaldi, right?

Quote from: karlhenning on March 14, 2008, 05:07:21 AM
This is why I love threads like this: I learn to my regret, that such a work has been entirely off my radar, and now I know to seek to amend that!

Seek it out, Karl. You will enjoy it, I'm certain of that. :)

Quote from: Mark on March 14, 2008, 05:15:28 AM

You mean Vivaldi, right?

No, Handel. At least I know one of the Concerti Grossi was copied from Handel's own Ode to St. Sicilia's Day, which was copied from a Muffat Suite. Talk about multiple recycling jobs!

(Of course, that does not take away from Handel's genius. Besides, it was a generally acceptable practice at the time, and everyone's guilty to a certain degree.)

When it comes down to the wire, I prefer Vivaldi myself, though I would hardly say I am VERY familiar with either.  What I have heard, I generally like both.  I tend to stick to the instrumental works in both cases though. 

I would also say that even though I *like* Vivaldi more, I would say Handel is *better*.  0:)

Quote from: springrite on March 14, 2008, 05:21:51 AM
. . . Handel's own Ode to St. Sicilia's Day . . . .

That Sainted Isle!  :)

It is, of course, all too illustrative of the internecine squabbling traditional in Italy, that an expatriate German in England would sing the praises of Sicily, rather than a Venetian.

 I really can't choose between these two Mark!!  I love Vivaldi's l'estro armonicos and Hadnel has fine moments as well (the Messiah, Italian cantatas and Water music). It's difficult to choose.


 marvin  

Quote from: karlhenning on March 14, 2008, 05:55:13 AM
It is, of course, all too illustrative of the internecine squabbling traditional in Italy, that an expatriate German in England would sing the praises of Sicily, rather than a Venetian.

Karl, I rather think Paul meant to refer to Handel's marvellous Ode to St. Cecilia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ode_for_St._Cecilia's_Day) ;)

Tee hee!

(And a most understandable misspelling;  though the time was brief, I have been on the island of Sicily, and it is a beautiful place, well deserving on Ode of its own!)

I have a much greater amount of Handel that of Vivaldi; so that probably answers the question. I do really connect with Vivaldi's Stabat Mater, so, he is certainly writing the kind of work I want to hear. I have several of his operas, but I tend not to listen to them often.

The Handel of Theodora, Dixit Dominus and the organ concerti is my frequent companion.

Mike

Quote from: karlhenning on March 14, 2008, 06:44:39 AM
Tee hee!

(And a most understandable misspelling;  though the time was brief, I have been on the island of Sicily, and it is a beautiful place, well deserving on Ode of its own!)

Your understanding is greatly appreciated! I try to spell as phonetically as possible to make the guess work easier.  ;D

Vivaldi has his strong moments. I am particularly drawn to the D minor concerto (no. 11) from L'estro armonico.

Overall, I think Handel has much more to offer in terms of variety, depth of expression, and theatricality. The operas of his I've seen (Agrippina, Orlando, Acis and Galatea) really work on the stage.

When I was a kid I fell in love with a recording of Handel flute sonatas, and my first compositional efforts were attempts to imitate them on a plastic flutophone which happened to be sitting around the house. This led to me taking up the recorder, and from there the clarinet. So I have a lot to thank Handel for.

Quote from: knight on March 14, 2008, 06:46:01 AM
I have a much greater amount of Handel that of Vivaldi; so that probably answers the question.
Mike

Same here, and I gave away the Vivaldi discs/sets that I did have.  In my personal hierarchy of high baroque composers:

1.  Bach
2.  Handel
3.  Zelenka
4.  Telemann

I'm not ashamed to admit it, my personal tastes run strongly toward Vivaldi.  I have more Vivaldi in my collection than any other baroque composer save JS Bach.  Vivaldi had a real genius for melody, it seems to me, tossing out lovely, singable lines at a clip that sometimes reminds me of Mozart.  He's also the one baroque composer where recordings have really convinced me that HIP is the way to go -- I have my fair share of big-band recordings from the 60s & 70s that make Vivaldi seem a bit stodgy and repetitive, but when I listen to somebody like Carmignola play his late concerti, I'm amazed at the inexhaustible energy Vivaldi's music can create, it literally tries to yank you out of  your chair and make you dance around the room.  I'm also amazed at his ability to generate so many concerti for so many solo instruments -- I love the ones for bassoon, oboe, recorder, flute, cello, lute, etc. -- and the way he brings out the unique qualities of each instrument, it's not like he's just recycling violin concerti and redistributing the parts.

I've tried a decent amount of Handel, primarily Pinnock in the concerti & the Brilliant box of the chamber works (+ the Messiah, naturally), and while I do enjoy it, it never grabs me in the way that Vivaldi and Bach do -- purely a deficiency on my part, it goes without saying, and I shall keep at it. 

One last point: while I like this thread, I generally don't spend much time thinking about Vivaldi in relation to the German baroque school -- stylistically Vivaldi is after something very different than Bach or Handel, and it's like comparing apples and oranges to a certain extent, IMO.  To take a pop music example, arguing Vivaldi vs Handel is sort of like arguing Johnny Cash vs James Brown -- yes they were contemporaries, they both scored some top 40 hits on the same charts, they both shared a few common influences, but given the radical differences in their musical output, how can you really compare them?  But as Karl and Mark have pointed out, it's good that this thread is clearly about personal preferences, not another "who's the best composer?" hoe-down.

I have great affection for both composers in more or less equal measure; however, Vivaldi's operatic output would make me lean slightly in his favour for the needs of this poll.

Quote from: jwinter on March 14, 2008, 08:57:53 AM
... while I like this thread, I generally don't spend much time thinking about Vivaldi in relation to the German baroque school -- stylistically Vivaldi is after something very different than Bach or Handel, and it's like comparing apples and oranges to a certain extent, IMO.

I agree with this comment.

I wonder what Rod thinks?  ???

Handel tips the scales for me for all sorts of reasons, but Vivaldi can me more of a charmer, and I wouldn't want to be without more than a few of his pieces.

Quote from: jwinter on March 14, 2008, 08:57:53 AM
One last point: while I like this thread, I generally don't spend much time thinking about Vivaldi in relation to the German baroque school -- stylistically Vivaldi is after something very different than Bach or Handel, and it's like comparing apples and oranges to a certain extent, IMO.

Believe it or not, there is a simple rationale behind my desire to compare these two Baroque giants. Namely, that they - along with Bach and Telemann - are arguably the 'big names' of the period. There'd be no contest if Bach were involved; and if I'd gone for one of this pair against the once very popular Telemann, I fear Mr T would've done very badly (or at least, earned only Harry's vote). So Handel versus Vivaldi it had to be.

Well, strictly speaking, there didn't have to be any comparing at all, did there?

(I'm no fun, I know) ;D

Quote from: lukeottevanger on March 14, 2008, 11:07:27 AM
Well, strictly speaking, there didn't have to be any comparing at all, did there?

(I'm no fun, I know) ;D

True. But comparisons are fun ... you killjoy! >:( ;D

Guilty as charged.

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.  In my personal hierarchy of high baroque composers:

1.  Bach
2.  Handel
3.  Zelenka
4.  Telemann

I have very little Vivaldi in my collection (a little goes a long way), even less Telemann (whatever I've heard has been a snooze), no Zelenka (haven't gotten into him yet), some Handel (a lot goes a long way), tons of Bach (no limit as to what goes a long way), as well as respectable amounts of Rameau, Couperin, Purcell, and D. Scarlatti in my personal hierarchy of the high baroque.

Quote from: lukeottevanger on March 14, 2008, 10:56:26 AM
I wonder what Rod thinks?  ???

If anything, this thread proves that Handel's predilection to vocal works as opposed to instrumental music does more to prevent the diffusion of his compositions (and by extension his reputation) rather then whatever dubious conspiracy theory.

My vote is for Handel, at any rate.

Quote from: jwinter on March 14, 2008, 08:57:53 AM
One last point: while I like this thread, I generally don't spend much time thinking about Vivaldi in relation to the German baroque school -- stylistically Vivaldi is after something very different than Bach or Handel, and it's like comparing apples and oranges to a certain extent, IMO.

There's nothing "German" about Handel, he's Italian through and through. He has much more in common with Vivaldi (and even more with the previous generation of Italian composers: Scarlatti, Correlli and Pasquini) then with the great cantor. This trend to bracket Bach and Handel together when they have absolutely zero in common (other then their nationality) IS in fact a big misconception.

I'd have to give it up for Handel. I love Vivaldi's Four Seasons, and not too much else. Handel just has so many amazing sacred works and operas...for me it's an easy preference.

I like both composers but Händel is much greater to me.

JS Bach's choice was Vivaldi! From whom he actually learned a lot.   :)

So, much love for both composers, it would seem.

Quote from: Mark on March 15, 2008, 01:23:30 AM
So, much love for both composers, it would seem.

And all we need is love.

I voted for il caro sassone.

For operas, I prefer Handel. I think Vivaldi's opera arias are generally more exciting and fiery. I came to the conclusion that Vivaldi elicits a more emotional response to music, while Handel a logical one. For non vocal music I prefer Vivaldi, Handel puts me to sleep.


nel profondo cieco mondo
http://youtube.com/watch/v/skbYd-wYPZE

al lampo dell'armi
http://youtube.com/watch/v/yjCyrNI-48A

Quote from: Haffner on March 14, 2008, 12:20:54 PM
I'd have to give it up for Handel. I love Vivaldi's Four Seasons, and not too much else. Handel just has so many amazing sacred works and operas...for me it's an easy preference.

Well to be fair, there are alot more good recordings of Handel's opera and oratorios than Vivaldi's.

Quote from: E..L..I..A..S.. =) on March 16, 2008, 11:55:59 AM
Well to be fair, there are alot more good recordings of Handel's opera and oratorios than Vivaldi's.

I think that's mitigated by the fact Vivaldi is getting a complete edition where's Handel is not.

I would say Handel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXJcMedsmw8

Quote from: 71 dB on March 15, 2008, 12:40:28 AM
I like both composers but Händel is much greater to me.

Me too.

Who voted neither?  $:)

Quote from: Wanderer on March 17, 2008, 03:48:27 AM
Who voted neither?  $:)

I did  >:D

Quote from: Gustav on March 17, 2008, 08:42:48 AM
I did  >:D

I'm sure it won't be too long till we see you banned from these premises, probably under pretext of a totally different yet similarly shameful reason.  :-*

So, after climbing in tandem in popularity here, these two composers are now separated by a gap - with Handel taking the lead. Is now a good time to suggest that, in the Holy Trinity of Baroque composers, the order is Bach, Handel, Vivaldi?

Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 11:31:31 AM
Is now a good time to suggest that, in the Holy Trinity of Baroque composers, the order is Bach, Handel, Vivaldi?

That sound about right to me.  0:)

Quote from: just josh on March 17, 2008, 11:33:19 AM
That sound about right to me.  0:)

But I'm sure some will argue for Telemann's inclusion, given his influence and popularity in his own day. Then again, that's like suggesting Spohr should replace Beethoven in the Holy Classical Trinity of Mozart, Beethoven, Haydn.

The problem with those trios is that poor Johannes is left all alone.

Quote from: E..L..I..A..S.. =) on March 17, 2008, 11:54:18 AM
The problem with those trios is that poor Johannes is left all alone.

You could say Romantic: Wagner, Brahms, Mahler...Tchaikovsky, Schumann, Grieg...there's so many!

Quote from: Haffner on March 17, 2008, 01:25:44 PM

You could say Romantic: Wagner, Brahms, Mahler...Tchaikovsky, Schumann, Grieg...there's so many!

Andy, I think Romantic's Holy Trinity would probably look like this: Schubert, Berlioz, Wagner. That's taken chronologically, mind.

Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 01:29:21 PM
Andy, I think Romantic's Holy Trinity would probably look like this: Schubert, Berlioz, Wagner. That's taken chronologically, mind.

That definitely has my vote as a good 'un, Mark!

Quote from: Haffner on March 17, 2008, 01:30:33 PM



That definitely has my vote as a good 'un, Mark!

I suppose that Brahms really ought to replace Berlioz, but the Frenchman was a huge influence back then (and still is, apparently), and certainly a Romantic through and through.

agreed that Brahms should replace Berlioz, though i do love Berlioz. But in this mix i assume your are counting Beethoven in the classical period? at least i would hope.

But back to the time of the "enlightenment" i picked the Red Priest for 2 reasons. 1. He wrote so many concertos for so many different instruments, Vivaldi = the recorders best friend. 2. Handel has never done anything for me, can someone give me some suggestions aside for the Messiah, which i can't stand. I know, i know let the arrows begin to fly, i hate the Messiah.

Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 11:31:31 AM
So, after climbing in tandem in popularity here, these two composers are now separated by a gap - with Handel taking the lead. Is now a good time to suggest that, in the Holy Trinity of Baroque composers, the order is Bach, Handel, Vivaldi?

I would definitely disagree with the three spot. Rameau would get my vote. Easily. And I might even bump Vivaldi clear to sixth after two other overlooked baroque Frenchmen: Lully and Charpentier. Like Handel, this French trio is more opera/stage centered and have seen their (mainstream) stock rise only in the wake of HIP with it's fresh approach to baroque opera.

Put together their output perhaps struggles to reach Vivaldi's lofty heights but the quality and originality of what's available - which isn't negligible, by any stretch - more than fills the void.

Probably a minority opinion but it's how I'd vote given the option...

Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 11:31:31 AM
Is now a good time to suggest that, in the Holy Trinity of Baroque composers, the order is Bach, Handel, Vivaldi?

Nope. After Bach and Handel, Scarlatti (Domenico), Rameau, Monteverdi, Schutz, Zelenka must all come before Vivaldi. 

I generally prefer the Italians in the baroque era, BUT I love Handel and even though I like Vivaldi, he never wrote Alexander's Feast now did he? :-X

True, but Handel never wrote Orlando Furioso.

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on March 17, 2008, 05:00:17 PM
Nope. After Bach and Handel, Scarlatti (Domenico), Rameau, Monteverdi, Schutz, Zelenka must all come before Vivaldi. 

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.

Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 11:31:31 AM
So, after climbing in tandem in popularity here, these two composers are now separated by a gap - with Handel taking the lead. Is now a good time to suggest that, in the Holy Trinity of Baroque composers, the order is Bach, Handel, Vivaldi?

If you limit yourself to the LATE Baroque; there's a large batch of early baroque composers scrambling to get into this list.

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.

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.

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.

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.  :)

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

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.

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.

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".

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:

(http://www.mdt.co.uk/public/pictures/products/standard/AV9823.jpg)

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

Quote from: E..L..I..A..S.. =) on March 17, 2008, 09:06:02 PM
True, but Handel never wrote Orlando Furioso.

Actually, he did.  ;D

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

My choice goes to Händel, especially for the Concerti Grossi

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.

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

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.