NationStates Jolt Archive

What is your favorite piece of Classical music?

As a violinist, I have great love and respect for classic music. I am especially fond of the Boroque period. My choice has to be Johanne Sebastian Bach's Brandenburg Concerto No. 1.

Hard one! There's so many good pieces to choose from. I really have no idea which is my favorite.

What I'd like to be listening to at the moment is 'Night on Bald Mountain', what with it being Halloween. My national anthem (which I have yet to finish writing) follows the tune of Ippolitov-Ivanov's 'Procession of the Sardar'.

Only one?

I'm no musician, but I enjoy listening. I think, of everything I've heard, I like Dvorak's 9th Symphony best.

I've always been a fan of the Carmina Burana.

:cool: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmina_Burana)

Prokofiev's 5th Symphony.

Shostakovich, 8th Symphony.

Most likely Danse Macabre by Saint-Saens or Bacchanale from Samson et Delila by Delibes.

1812 overture, enough said

Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture. It's like the pop music of the classical crowd! Vivaldi's seasons are kindof in that vein too.

But because I am a clarinetist, I am dutifully going to say Mozart's Clarinet Concerto in A major, k622.

piece I can't stand the most?
Rite of Spring - Igor Stravinsky. I can't stand it. Actually, I can't say as I like anything by Stravinsky, except maybe the Firebird Suite, if only because the name is so exceedingly cool.

EDIT dammit Mondoth!

I've always been a fan of the Carmina Burana.

:cool: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmina_Burana)

I've got to agree with you on that one.

Do you mean Carl Orff's version, or the other one? Either way, great music!

Beethoven's 9th. There is no second to this. It is complete bliss.

I can only pick one? You cruel person :(

Well, probably the third movement of Vivaldi's "Summer"... If I had to pick only one =\ It pumps me up fairly well, as does the remixed version of it by Vanessa-Mae named "Storm"

...

HA! You can't stop me! :p I'm picking a 2nd! :D

Mozart - Duettino Che Soave zeffiretto
Fairly well known piece from the marriage of figaro. Great bit of music to relax to :D

Beethoven's 9th. There is no second to this. It is complete bliss.
Beethoven's 6th owns the 9th. The first two movements of the 9th are interminable.

and the 7th too.

Meistersingers of Nuremberg by Wagner.

Such a wonderful violin part.

Although, Walton's Viola Concerto is a close second.

Beethoven's 9th is, in my opinion, the only even marginally-compelling argument for the existence of a soul or god.

Beethoven's 6th owns the 9th. The first two movements of the 9th are interminable.

and the 7th too.

The 4th movement of the 9th is amazing. WHen going with Beethoven, I have to say his 5th Symphony.

That is an utterly impossible question. It depends entirely on my mood, and of course on whether I'm performing or merely listening as well. (Besides, how does one go about comparing, say, a Pärt choral piece, a Chopin étude, a Mozart opera, and a Tchaikovsky symphony? Apples to oranges, to say the least!) :)

(Besides, how does one go about comparing, say, a Pärt choral piece, a Chopin étude, a Mozart opera, and a Tchaikovsky symphony? Apples to oranges, to say the least!) :)

Easy. The choral piece is inevitably dull without orchestral drama. The Chopin etude is boring unless you or someone you know is performing. The Mozart opera, well, lets just leave Mozart out of it. Tchaikovsky symphony? No. 6! For the win!

Also, apples are red and irregularly shaped, and sweet. Oranges are orange, spherical, and tangy. See?

The 4th movement of the 9th is amazing. WHen going with Beethoven, I have to say his 5th Symphony.

I'm not really bought on the 5th. It's a bit to overdone, so to speak. It's still great, however I just don't like it as much. However his 9th was as perfect as any mortal could ever even hope to accomplish, and invokes such great awe. It is extraordinary that he composed the entire piece while completely deaf, to the point of being unfathomable.

Beethoven was one of the most brilliant artists ever born.

The point is that apples and oranges are too different to be compared, not that they're the same.

Beethoven's 9th is, in my opinion, the only even marginally-compelling argument for the existence of a soul or god.

I've long found good music to be about the best argument for such.

I'd add quite a lot more pieces to the list, though. Just for one example, when a Very Good Choir I was in sang Mozart's Requiem a few years back, by the end of one rehearsal of the Lacrimosa, literally half of the choir - that's about 40 serious, professional musicians who do this stuff all the time - were in tears. We all spent the next several minutes just staring at each other and saying, ".....wow." It was that freaking perfect. Experiences like that are why I'm a musician. :)

I'm not really bought on the 5th. It's a bit to overdone, so to speak. It's still great, however I just don't like it as much. However his 9th was as perfect as any mortal could ever even hope to accomplish, and invokes such great awe. It is extraordinary that he composed the entire piece while completely deaf, to the point of being unfathomable.

Beethoven was one of the most brilliant artists ever born.
I agree on the 5th. And contend that the 6th is better than the 9th, because it tells a story. There is no part of the 6th that one cannot listen to, and not know exactly why it was called Szene am Bach or Gewitter, Sturm or Erwachen heiterer Empfindungen bei der Ankunft auf dem Lande (descriptions are just so much more interesting in German). Thus, the 6th is more perfect. The 9th was just a milk commercial 190 years in the making.

Easy. The choral piece is inevitably dull without orchestral drama. The Chopin etude is boring unless you or someone you know is performing. The Mozart opera, well, lets just leave Mozart out of it. Tchaikovsky symphony? No. 6! For the win!


Oh no you DIDN'T! :p

<---is a professional (well, semi-professional, which is to say that I get paid, but not enough to live on) choral singer

<---loves unaccompanied choral music with a great and abiding passion

<---knows you have never heard a Pärt piece, as the phrase that springs to mind to describe them sounds a lot more like "mind-blowingly gorgeous" than "boring," and, furthermore, if you think choral pieces intrinsically lack drama, you're just nuts.

However, I'll forgive you just this once, on the grounds that Tchaikovsky's Pathétique is my favorite of his symphonies as well, so clearly you are just misguided rather than being utterly without taste. ;)

I agree on the 5th. And contend that the 6th is better than the 9th, because it tells a story. There is no part of the 6th that one cannot listen to, and know exactly why it was called Szene am Bach or Gewitter, Sturm or Erwachen heiterer Empfindungen bei der Ankunft auf dem Lande (descriptions are just so much more interesting in German). Thus, the 6th is more perfect. The 9th was just a milk commercial 190 years in the making.

To tell the truth, I have never heard the 6th, and cannot seem to find much on it. I'm going to have to check it out, definately, but it's quite odd, as nobody I know(I've been checking around in the past few minutes between people whom I know that listen to Classical) seems to have it.

However, after looking at the breakdown of it, it definately looks quite interesting. I may have to expand my library, and keep my eyes open.

To tell the truth, I have never heard the 6th, and cannot seem to find much on it. I'm going to have to check it out, definately, but it's quite odd, as nobody I know(I've been checking around in the past few minutes between people whom I know that listen to Classical) seems to have it.

However, after looking at the breakdown of it, it definately looks quite interesting. I may have to expand my library, and keep my eyes open.
it plays like theme music; it is an incredibly calm and composed piece, surprisingly so for Beethoven, particularly Erwachen..., the first movement. I love the fourth movement of the 9th, but i can't sit through the first three movements to get to it. Maybe if I were more patient to 'get to the good part' I'd like it more.

Oh lordy. Suffice it to say I quite like the Austro-Hungarian, German, and Russian late classical, romanticists, neo-classicists, and neo-romanticists.

it plays like theme music; it is an incredibly calm and composed piece, surprisingly so for Beethoven, particularly Erwachen..., the first movement. I love the fourth movement of the 9th, but i can't sit through the first three movements to get to it. Maybe if I were more patient to 'get to the good part' I'd like it more.

Actually, I love the first three movements, as well as the fourth. I like the calm part quite well, and to me it all fits quite well. However, to each his own.

I am definately going to find the 6th. Sounds amazing.

Russian classical is ridiculously awesome.

Russian classical is ridiculously awesome.

Indeed it is. Makes the music of today seem... well, like shite. To tell the truth.

Very, very true.

Verse 1:

What Child is this who, laid to rest
On Mary’s lap is sleeping?
Whom angels greet with anthems sweet,
While shepherds watch are keeping?
Chorus 1:

This, this is Christ the King,
Whom shepherds guard and angels sing;
Haste, haste, to bring Him laud,
The Babe, the Son of Mary.
Verse 2:

Why lies He in such mean estate,
Where ox and ass are feeding?
Good Christians, fear, for sinners here
The silent Word is pleading.
Chorus 2:

Nails, spear shall pierce Him through,
The cross be borne for me, for you.
Hail, hail the Word made flesh,
The Babe, the Son of Mary.
Verse 3:

So bring Him incense, gold and myrrh,
Come peasant, king to own Him;
The King of kings salvation brings,
Let loving hearts enthrone Him.
Chorus 3:

Raise, raise a song on high,
The virgin sings her lullaby.
Joy, joy for Christ is born,
The Babe, the Son of Mary.

OR, same music:

Alas, my love, you do me wrong,
To cast me off discourteously.
For I have loved you well and long,
Delighting in your company.

Chorus:
Greensleeves was all my joy
Greensleeves was my delight,
Greensleeves was my heart of gold,
And who but my lady greensleeves.

Your vows you've broken, like my heart,
Oh, why did you so enrapture me?
Now I remain in a world apart
But my heart remains in captivity.

(Chorus)

I have been ready at your hand,
To grant whatever you would crave,
I have both wagered life and land,
Your love and good-will for to have.

(Chorus)

If you intend thus to disdain,
It does the more enrapture me,
And even so, I still remain
A lover in captivity.

(Chorus)

My men were clothed all in green,
And they did ever wait on thee;
All this was gallant to be seen,
And yet thou wouldst not love me.

(Chorus)

Thou couldst desire no earthly thing,
but still thou hadst it readily.
Thy music still to play and sing;
And yet thou wouldst not love me.

(Chorus)

Well, I will pray to God on high,
that thou my constancy mayst see,
And that yet once before I die,
Thou wilt vouchsafe to love me.

(Chorus)

Ah, Greensleeves, now farewell, adieu,
To God I pray to prosper thee,
For I am still thy lover true,
Come once again and love me.

(Chorus)

What is your favorite piece of Classical music?

As a violinist, I have great love and respect for classic music. I am especially fond of the Boroque period. My choice has to be Johanne Sebastian Bach's Brandenburg Concerto No. 1.Pacabel's Canon in D.

I could listen to that all night.

The heavy Tschakovsky music - cannons for instruments in live performances. Brilliant.

The heavy Tschakovsky music - cannons for instruments in live performances. Brilliant.

As Calvin said: "And they perform this in crowded concert halls?? Gee, I thought classical music was boring!"

Bethoven's 3rd is probably my favorite. I've only heard the 5th and 6th all the way through once. His 9th is awesome, as well. Some stuff by Wagner and the Mighty Handful composers is great, too.

Pacabel's Canon in D.

I could listen to that all night.

I think you mean Pachelbel's, but otherwise, you are oh so right.

Still, my vote would have to go to the one and only Bolero. Ravel made almost nothing else I like, but I can forgive all for the Bolero.

gosh, i dunno. carcassi is probably my favourite composer for the guitar but i haven't played anything by him for ages so i don't remember particular opuses or anything, maybe opus 60 but it could just as well have been 5. More contemporary stuff, i like marc andes stuff from the 50's, great fun to play. as for orchestral stuff i like the planets suite and the rite of spring and other stuff too, whatever catches my attention on the radio.

Ach, so hard to choose! Currently, I'm on a Morten Lauridsen kick--there's just something about his O Magnum Mysterium--don't know how to explain it, except it's the closest I can get to experiencing the divine. If I could ever sing it....

'Sides, this thread is a little light on the choral/vocal side of things. Going back to lurking now. :-)

Gustav Holst's The Planets. Of course, John Williams had to go and steal a lot of it for "his" music for Star Wars.

Oh no you DIDN'T! :p

Mm-hmm!

<---is a professional (well, semi-professional, which is to say that I get paid, but not enough to live on) choral singer

<---loves unaccompanied choral music with a great and abiding passion

Bah. I'm not a singer, and I've known too many of them. Too much hot air. I don't mind a chorus when it's part of actual music, but when it's just a chance for some stuffed up choral director (and they all are) to show off the vocal skillz of his pets it annoys me.

<---knows you have never heard a Pärt piece, as the phrase that springs to mind to describe them sounds a lot more like "mind-blowingly gorgeous" than "boring," and, furthermore, if you think choral pieces intrinsically lack drama, you're just nuts.

I have indeed heard some of his work, and it's just not my style. Choral pieces intrinsically lack drama because they have basically no percussive quality, and rely way too much on the power of the words and their meaning, which is cheating. It's like me having strip dancers during a symphony performance. Of course people will like it, but it has nothing to do with the actual *music*.

My favourites are The Flower Duet from Lakmé by Delibes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWqup5t1FHU) and Der Hölle Rache, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvuKxL4LOqc) by Mozart.

Elgar's Variations on a Theme Op.36 "Nimrod", I'd say.

I'm unable to name a single favorite, but Johann Sebastian Bach's Kantate BWV 147 Jesus Bleibet Meine Freude is definitely among them.

Ach, so hard to choose! Currently, I'm on a Morten Lauridsen kick--there's just something about his O Magnum Mysterium--don't know how to explain it, except it's the closest I can get to experiencing the divine. If I could ever sing it....

'Sides, this thread is a little light on the choral/vocal side of things. Going back to lurking now. :-)

Lauridsen is fun - I have sung his O Magnum Mysterium, and in a particularly cool setting at that - the choir I was in at the time performed it standing in a giant circle around the edges of a cathedral with the audience in the middle, which made for a pretty amazing sound. :)

Let's see...

Stravinsky's Firebird

Verdi's Requiem Mass

Prokofiev's Romeo & Juliet

And everyone's favourite, Bach's Tocatta and Fugue in D Minor.

Still, my vote would have to go to the one and only Bolero.

I definately agree with Bolero. It's one of the best ways I've found to spend an extra 15 minutes. I've always been surprised at how much I like it since it only has 2 rather short themes repeted over and over!

My wife, on the other hand, has the completely opposite view of it. She says it reminds her of the warm-up esercises she had to do in band, and she runs away as soon as it starts. She has banned me from playing that CD! :headbang:

I've always been a fan of the Carmina Burana.

:cool: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmina_Burana)

my favourite weight lifting album.

i could never pick one, but for today, i'll say that beethoven's sonatas (esp. appassionata, pathetique and moonlight, probably in that order) are right up there.

but i played piano for a long time, so that's my bias.

Bah. I'm not a singer, and I've known too many of them. Too much hot air. I don't mind a chorus when it's part of actual music, but when it's just a chance for some stuffed up choral director (and they all are) to show off the vocal skillz of his pets it annoys me.

Heh. All choral directors aren't stuck up pains in the butt - that's only about 90% of them. :p


I have indeed heard some of his work, and it's just not my style. Choral pieces intrinsically lack drama because they have basically no percussive quality, and rely way too much on the power of the words and their meaning, which is cheating. It's like me having strip dancers during a symphony performance. Of course people will like it, but it has nothing to do with the actual *music*.

Fair enough if you don't like Pärt (I think you're silly, but tastes do vary, after all), but I dispute that choral pieces as a whole necessarily lack percussive qualities. Just for an easy example, are you particularly acquainted with the madrigal genre? There's a heckuva lot of pieces out there in which the "fa la la"s effectively serve as little staccato punctuation marks.

As far as the "words" issue goes, by your argument, you'd have to consider pretty much all program music to be "cheating." Berlioz's Symphony Fantastique doesn't involve singing, but there's no doubt that the famous "severed head bouncing into the basket" moment gains a great deal of significance and power from the fact that, when listening to it, you think of a severed head bouncing into a basket. Given that (IIRC) the majority of pieces listed so far in this thread have been programmatic, I think the inherent cheating-ness of program music is going to be a hard sell to a lot of people. :)

all of Beethoven, but to break it down, the 9th and the 5th are my two favorites.

As for classical guitar, I just heard a piece that rocked my world.

Sonata Mongoliana composed by Stepen Rak.

I saw it performed at U of A's graduate guitar competition and it was the most phenominal guitar piece I have ever heard.

What is your favorite piece of Classical music?

"Ode to Joy" - Beethoven

"Ode to Joy" - Beethoven

This is my favorite when played by my son on the piano.

I also like Beethoven's Moonlight Sonatas

Chopin is my favourite composer and his nocturnes are my favourite music

Nocturne no. 20 in C sharp minor <- pure brilliance

Zadok the Prest and See, the Conqu'ring hero comes by Handel and also Fantasia on British Sea Songs

Fair enough if you don't like Pärt (I think you're silly, but tastes do vary, after all), but I dispute that choral pieces as a whole necessarily lack percussive qualities. Just for an easy example, are you particularly acquainted with the madrigal genre? There's a heckuva lot of pieces out there in which the "fa la la"s effectively serve as little staccato punctuation marks.

Yeah that's rhythm, but it's not percussive.

As far as the "words" issue goes, by your argument, you'd have to consider pretty much all program music to be "cheating." Berlioz's Symphony Fantastique doesn't involve singing, but there's no doubt that the famous "severed head bouncing into the basket" moment gains a great deal of significance and power from the fact that, when listening to it, you think of a severed head bouncing into a basket.

It's an entirely different mechanism. When you listen to sung words, the ear hears the words and interprets them as language. Language itself has a powerful artistic factor all it's own, so the music is now "borrowing" from that non-musical aspect to lend itself added weight. In fact, most popular music in the form of songs depends utterly on that. There's no mistaking words - you hear them, you know it's a guy singing the words, and unless you don't know the language your brain is involved in directly translating language and deriving meaning from that. Often to the exclusion of music.

As opposed to program music, which is more like a general "this music is supposed to represent da da da." Frankly, I've heard that symphony plenty of times and I wasn't even AWARE that there was a "severed head bouncing in basket" thing. I'd be hard pressed to remember just what passage that's supposed to refer to.

But if the music had words that said, "blah blah, severed heads bouncing in baskets!" it'd be different. Essentially, program music only has a program if you bother to read the program - and even then, since there's no words involved in the actual music, you're still just listening to something musically and not linguistically.

In essence, lyrical music employs and, often, depends on literary art.

I could make your argument against program music work for, say, opera or ballet, however. And I'd agree there too - it's the same thing - music being suborned by (one might say tainted by) another form of art.

Yeah that's rhythm, but it's not percussive.

Eh, I suppose it's a question of semantics at this point. I do see it as percussive, though. (I've also sung a very strange experimental piece in which lyrics included things like "Tzt! Tzt! Tzt! Tzt! Tzt tzt tzt! Tzt tzt tzt!" That choral piece, at the very least, is percussive, even if it's the exception rather than the rule.)


It's an entirely different mechanism. When you listen to sung words, the ear hears the words and interprets them as language. Language itself has a powerful artistic factor all it's own, so the music is now "borrowing" from that non-musical aspect to lend itself added weight. In fact, most popular music in the form of songs depends utterly on that. There's no mistaking words - you hear them, you know it's a guy singing the words, and unless you don't know the language your brain is involved in directly translating language and deriving meaning from that. Often to the exclusion of music.

As opposed to program music, which is more like a general "this music is supposed to represent da da da." Frankly, I've heard that symphony plenty of times and I wasn't even AWARE that there was a "severed head bouncing in basket" thing. I'd be hard pressed to remember just what passage that's supposed to refer to.

But if the music had words that said, "blah blah, severed heads bouncing in baskets!" it'd be different. Essentially, program music only has a program if you bother to read the program - and even then, since there's no words involved in the actual music, you're still just listening to something musically and not linguistically.

In essence, lyrical music employs and, often, depends on literary art.

I could make your argument against program music work for, say, opera or ballet, however. And I'd agree there too - it's the same thing - music being suborned by (one might say tainted by) another form of art.

Actually, I have good reason to dispute your statement that "program music only has a program if you bother to read the program." I took a very fun course on programmatic music in college, and one of the class's frequent activities was for our professor to play a few minutes of some piece of music and ask us "What's going on here?" (People who were already familiar with the piece were requested to keep silent.) In every single case, the class correctly described what the piece was intended to depict, without knowing the title, the composer, or anything other than what they heard. It's honestly rather difficult to hear, say, the fourth movement of Beethoven's Pastoral and not think "oh noes, thunderstorm!" Heck, even nominally un-programmatic pieces like Beethoven's 5th can tell stories - pretty much anyone listening to that gets the general point of "the music was dark and angsty, and now it is happy! Yay!"

The thing is, lyrics are just an extra way of doing what music already does. It's meant to tell stories; it's meant to convey emotion. Lyrics are just one more way of doing that.

(Oh, and in case you're curious, the "bouncing head" bit is near the end of the fourth movement, the "March to the Scaffold," immediately after the big dramatic "chopping off his head" chord. Now that you know it's there, I suspect you'll be able to pick it out easily.) :)

Eh, I suppose it's a question of semantics at this point. I do see it as percussive, though. (I've also sung a very strange experimental piece in which lyrics included things like "Tzt! Tzt! Tzt! Tzt! Tzt tzt tzt! Tzt tzt tzt!" That choral piece, at the very least, is percussive, even if it's the exception rather than the rule.)

Rhythmic plosives. Still not percussion.

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t641/T641570A.jpg

Yarr! That's percussion!

Actually, I have good reason to dispute your statement that "program music only has a program if you bother to read the program." I took a very fun course on programmatic music in college, and one of the class's frequent activities was for our professor to play a few minutes of some piece of music and ask us "What's going on here?" (People who were already familiar with the piece were requested to keep silent.) In every single case, the class correctly described what the piece was intended to depict, without knowing the title, the composer, or anything other than what they heard.

That's interesting, but I would say that too is an exception rather than the rule. Who can listen to the last piece of Stravinsky's Rite of Spring and go, "Aha! It's a bunch of pagans making a sacrificial virgin dance to death!"

It's honestly rather difficult to hear, say, the fourth movement of Beethoven's Pastoral and not think "oh noes, thunderstorm!" Heck, even nominally un-programmatic pieces like Beethoven's 5th can tell stories - pretty much anyone listening to that gets the general point of "the music was dark and angsty, and now it is happy! Yay!"

Being able to get an emotional impression from music is not the same as being told, literally, what the music is through words. You can ignore a programme. You can't ignore lyrics. And they drown out the music - music becomes "accompanyment." No better than a background score for a movie. The music is now serving some other art form.


The thing is, lyrics are just an extra way of doing what music already does. It's meant to tell stories; it's meant to convey emotion. Lyrics are just one more way of doing that.

Oh sure - and naked titty dancers is yet another way of doing that. But no matter how delectable they are, it's not music.

Music isn't "meant" to convey anything other than music. If anything, it's a dialogue between sonic motives and patterns and themes. It may evoke a sense of "story," but it's not TELLING a story in the same way you write one down and others read it. Or in the sense of lyrics telling words.

Music is it's own 'language' and it's very ambiguous - adding words so that unimaginative people can 'get' it is like a pop-up book. It's insulting. I'm a musician, I don't need to hear bullshit poetry.

(Oh, and in case you're curious, the "bouncing head" bit is near the end of the fourth movement, the "March to the Scaffold," immediately after the big dramatic "chopping off his head" chord. Now that you know it's there, I suspect you'll be able to pick it out easily.) :)

I guess, but I've never heard it that way before, and that's the point - you need to tell me, non-musically, the 'program.' In much the same way that I would need to be told, non-musically, the lyrical program. The major difference is in the former case, it's not interfering with the music experience, whereas the latter, it is.

"Ode to Joy" - Beethoven

THat would be the 4th movement in his 9th symphony

Rhythmic plosives. Still not percussion.

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t641/T641570A.jpg

Yarr! That's percussion!



That's interesting, but I would say that too is an exception rather than the rule. Who can listen to the last piece of Stravinsky's Rite of Spring and go, "Aha! It's a bunch of pagans making a sacrificial virgin dance to death!"



Being able to get an emotional impression from music is not the same as being told, literally, what the music is through words. You can ignore a programme. You can't ignore lyrics. And they drown out the music - music becomes "accompanyment." No better than a background score for a movie. The music is now serving some other art form.



Oh sure - and naked titty dancers is yet another way of doing that. But no matter how delectable they are, it's not music.

Music isn't "meant" to convey anything other than music. If anything, it's a dialogue between sonic motives and patterns and themes. It may evoke a sense of "story," but it's not TELLING a story in the same way you write one down and others read it. Or in the sense of lyrics telling words.

Music is it's own 'language' and it's very ambiguous - adding words so that unimaginative people can 'get' it is like a pop-up book. It's insulting. I'm a musician, I don't need to hear bullshit poetry.



I guess, but I've never heard it that way before, and that's the point - you need to tell me, non-musically, the 'program.' In much the same way that I would need to be told, non-musically, the lyrical program. The major difference is in the former case, it's not interfering with the music experience, whereas the latter, it is.

I think you and I may just have to agree to disagree on this one. I consider the emotion a piece conveys and the "story" a piece tells, if there is one, to be extremely fundamental to the "music experience," and I certainly don't see lyrics as something outside of the music.

Heck, if absolutely nothing else, there are many different sounds that can be made by the wonderfully versatile instrument that is the human voice. Why should composers not exploit these variations in sound? If, say, DEE-ESS-EE-RAE-DEE-ESS-EE-LAA happen to be the noises a given composer thinks will sound good in his or her piece, is it so awful that those noises also happen to mean something? ;)

I think you and I may just have to agree to disagree on this one. I consider the emotion a piece conveys and the "story" a piece tells, if there is one, to be extremely fundamental to the "music experience," and I certainly don't see lyrics as something outside of the music.


Oh we can agree to disagree, just so long as it's clear that I'm right. :p

(Sadly it won't be. My view is very unpopular. Everyone likes lyrical music.)


Heck, if absolutely nothing else, there are many different sounds that can be made by the wonderfully versatile instrument that is the human voice. Why should composers not exploit these variations in sound? If, say, DEE-ESS-EE-RAE-DEE-ESS-EE-LAA happen to be the noises a given composer thinks will sound good in his or her piece, is it so awful that those noises also happen to mean something? ;)

True, from a lower level perspective words can be broken down into just noises which can be seen as purely music. But on a higher level, the level of perception and interpretation, no one hears lyrics as that. Language is very, very recognizable to the human ear as a form of direct, verbal communication - even if the language is unknown.

And from the perspective of the composer, he doesn't choose lyrics based purely on the syllabic noises, but what they mean.

As for being awful... no, not always. But it's a great shame because as is obvious, 95% of music listened to is lyrical, depends on those words, and would be "only instrumental" and have little to no meaning without them to the average listener. Cuz listeners are lazy and like their pop-up books. :p

Oh we can agree to disagree, just so long as it's clear that I'm right. :p

(Sadly it won't be. My view is very unpopular. Everyone likes lyrical music.)

Heh. Yeah, I'm afraid you're not going to win any popularity contests on this one. At the same time, there are certainly people who would agree with you - the debate on the relative merits of programmatic (including lyrical) and non-programmatic music has been going on for centuries, and is likely to continue for centuries. So you can content yourself with the thought that you are at least in a respected minority, even if most of us think it's a slightly silly respected minority. :p


And from the perspective of the composer, he doesn't choose lyrics based purely on the syllabic noises, but what they mean.


True, composers rarely choose their lyrics purely on the basis of what phonemes they feel like using, but there's no doubt it's a real factor. Heck, I myself chose a particular poem to set as a choral piece some years ago based largely on its repetition of "oo" sounds.

Beethovens 5th, specifically movement 2 and 3

Heh. Yeah, I'm afraid you're not going to win any popularity contests on this one. At the same time, there are certainly people who would agree with you - the debate on the relative merits of programmatic (including lyrical) and non-programmatic music has been going on for centuries, and is likely to continue for centuries. So you can content yourself with the thought that you are at least in a respected minority, even if most of us think it's a slightly silly respected minority. :p


I've been content with it for some time. Just so long as I get foray out of my elitist musical castle now and then and bash some barbarians. :p


True, composers rarely choose their lyrics purely on the basis of what phonemes they feel like using, but there's no doubt it's a real factor. Heck, I myself chose a particular poem to set as a choral piece some years ago based largely on its repetition of "oo" sounds.

Of course, because it had to fit in with music, since you chose the already-written lyrics first.

But mind you, phonemes are not words nor are they independent of them, so the real determining factor is again language and word-construction. The most difficulty is a poetic one - making lyrics rhyme, the verses fit, etc. (Not that all lyrical music has rhyme, but generally most follow a poetic structure.)

Except with scat singing and some rap, which I can certainly appreciate.

Saltarello: Presto from symphony No. 4, "Italian"

Vivaldi's "four seasons", specifically "winter"

Love, love, LOVE Schoenberg string quartets!

Miserere Mei Deus, by Allegri. fucking amazing.

oh. and a bunch of mediaeval chanting sort of things. Mediaeval Baebes ftw - if they count as classical. "O Fortuna" is an incredible song. "Ebben? Ne Andro Lontana" is awesome. hildegard von bingen wrote some lovely stuff as well.

It's an entirely different mechanism. When you listen to sung words, the ear hears the words and interprets them as language. Language itself has a powerful artistic factor all it's own, so the music is now "borrowing" from that non-musical aspect to lend itself added weight. In fact, most popular music in the form of songs depends utterly on that. There's no mistaking words - you hear them, you know it's a guy singing the words, and unless you don't know the language your brain is involved in directly translating language and deriving meaning from that. Often to the exclusion of music.

My thoughts exactly. I don't generally go for vocal music as a result. It's also partly why I don't like punk even though it fits my politics. The lyrics may say things I tend to agree with, but the music itself is badly neglected (with obvious results). I do like the timbre of voice, though.

The one that ends up in my head most often would have to be Toreador from Bizet's Carmen.

If the words are excluding the music, then that has been badly written e.g. most popular music nowadays. If well written, I find the music and words complement each other to greater effect that either one on its own.

As to greatest piece of classical music, there are far too many to name, all in different styles that are appropiate to different moods. Shostakovich 5th, his piano concertos, Debussy Clair de lune, Bartok Concerto for Orchestra, Stravinsky Rite of Spring, Lotti Crucifixus (8 part), Holst The Planets Suite, Barber Adagio for Strings, to name but a few.

If the words are excluding the music, then that has been badly written e.g. most popular music nowadays. If well written, I find the music and words complement each other to greater effect that either one on its own.

Yeah, I don't bother with most popular music as a result.

I've always been a fan of the Carmina Burana.

Same here. My parents sang in a chorale group for many years & as I was a small child, I was often taken to many a late-night rehearsal & then the performance. They did Mozart, Verdi, all sorts of things, but the Burana was the only one I liked. Back then, it was because it was short--only an hour. Then I remembered snippets of my father singing parts & then I heard it again for myself. I researched what it was & I ADORE it. It's great to tell people what it is when they play "O Fortuna" oin flim ads all the time.

After that, I'd have to say Stravinsky's "Firebird Suite".

Same here. My parents sang in a chorale group for many years & as I was a small child, I was often taken to many a late-night rehearsal & then the performance. They did Mozart, Verdi, all sorts of things, but the Burana was the only one I liked. Back then, it was because it was short--only an hour. Then I remembered snippets of my father singing parts & then I heard it again for myself. I researched what it was & I ADORE it. It's great to tell people what it is when they play "O Fortuna" oin flim ads all the time.

After that, I'd have to say Stravinsky's "Firebird Suite".

the lyrics to carmina burana are much better than the music. it's one of the things that makes me remember why I ever wanted to learn latin.

the lyrics to carmina burana are much better than the music. it's one of the things that makes me remember why I ever wanted to learn latin.

But not JUST Latin. Middle High German, Old German...couple others.

Bach is the best!

I visited a house of his when I went to Germany, and sent a postcard back to my choir director which quite appropriately read (I am paraphrasing the German here): "Bach is the beginning and end of all music" When it comes to choral singing, I enjoy Handel (Although some pieces are quite difficult).

What do you think of movie and game scores in relation to classical music? In my mind such things are the modern equivalent of the good old stuff. I enjoy listening to John Williams, Joe Hisaish, Koji Kondo, and Chad A. Seiter just as much as I do listening to Strauss and Mozart.

Regardless, I cannot pick a single piece as my favourite...

P.S.: Oh, I went to a concert in the Summer that included a performance of the William Tell Overture, complete with cannons and a carillon.

Anyone heard or played the Brahms Piano Quartet No. 3 in C minor before?

I just started in on the first movement. It is, in fact, the first example of Emo in music ever. 2 of the 4 movements are apparently the musical equivalent of a suicide note (the adagio is also an ode to his love of Clara Schuman, and I have no clue what the first movement is; other than hard).

My thoughts exactly. I don't generally go for vocal music as a result. It's also partly why I don't like punk even though it fits my politics. The lyrics may say things I tend to agree with, but the music itself is badly neglected (with obvious results). I do like the timbre of voice, though.

In Punk's defense, it was a rejection of sounding good and being complex.

After all, part of the early rejectionist philosophy that spawned the real Punk movement (the first one; everything thereafter is just a new spin on an old thing) was the rejectionist philosophy that followed a philosophy not far from Schopenhauer. As far as Punks were concerned, beauty was just a lie.

I certainly don't listen to Punk for its musical complexity (although there is some modern math punk that is exceedingly difficult) or for it's beauty. And Velvet Underground did have a violist (to be fair, the viola parts suck, and a total beginner could play them), so they are superior to all other bands. :P

In Punk's defense, it was a rejection of sounding good and being complex.

After all, part of the early rejectionist philosophy that spawned the real Punk movement (the first one; everything thereafter is just a new spin on an old thing) was the rejectionist philosophy that followed a philosophy not far from Schopenhauer. As far as Punks were concerned, beauty was just a lie.

I certainly don't listen to Punk for its musical complexity (although there is some modern math punk that is exceedingly difficult) or for it's beauty. And Velvet Underground did have a violist (to be fair, the viola parts suck, and a total beginner could play them), so they are superior to all other bands. :P

That's a good point, actually. To me, though, beauty and musical sophistication are important, even more so than message. I may not agree with someone's politics, but I can respect them if they take their craft seriously. It's this rejectionist philosophy in anarchism that annoys me, really.

Anyone heard or played the Brahms Piano Quartet No. 3 in C minor before?

I just started in on the first movement. It is, in fact, the first example of Emo in music ever. 2 of the 4 movements are apparently the musical equivalent of a suicide note (the adagio is also an ode to his love of Clara Schuman, and I have no clue what the first movement is; other than hard).

Heh, I'll have to give that one a listen.

NO ONE is more emo than Mahler.

Except maybe John Cage. Which reminds me: they played the first or second note of "As Slow As Possible" about 2 years ago.

Eroica!

moonlight sonata all 3 movements

Shostakovich, 5th Symphony.
Bartok, Concerto for orchestra

Chopin <3

Let's see...

Prokofiev's Romeo & Juliet

And everyone's favourite, Bach's Tocatta and Fugue in D Minor.

I adore both of those. Trying to learn the Romeo and Juliet one on piano (failing miserably btw).

Also...hmm...
Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries
Strauss's Also Sprach Zarathustra
Pretty much any Vivaldi
Tchaikovsky

Oh and Puccini's Nessun Dorma.

I'll stop there. I could go on for days.

moonlight sonata all 3 movements

ooh... I have to say: No composer (in my opinion) has ever even paralleled Beethoven. There is no music more rich, complex, and passionate than his. Stop me if I'm wrong.

A few months ago, I decided I was too concentrated on Beethoven and needed to broaden my horizons, so I set my mind on listening to more. The next morning I was lucky enough that my alarm clock (which is set to a local classical station) started blaring a piece of music I'd never heard before- a piece so amazing that I immediately thought to myself that I'd found another composer. But when the piece ended, the radio host came on and said, "Yeah, that was Beethoven," in a voice that was clearly as blown away as mine. Well, I'm clearly obsessed with Beethoven, and I suppose that's how things will be. (By the way, it sadly turns out that that is a very rarely performed piece, so rare, in fact, that the closest library copy of it is all the way across the city. Oh well... Shubert is nice, but there's just no substitute for Beethoven.

1812 overture, enough said

Have you ever hear it performed as it was really supposed to be- with four cannons? Trust me; it's cool.

Beethoven's 6th owns the 9th. The first two movements of the 9th are interminable.

and the 7th too.

What!?! I love the first of the ninth! It's so dark and complex. If I ever want to beomce a brooding genious, I pick that one. And... How dare you speak ill of the seventh!?! Especially the second of the seventh; that's the standard for passionate minor music! You're crazy... :headbang:

Pachelbel's Canon in D.

I could listen to that all night.

I have listened to that all night.

Bethoven's 3rd is probably my favorite. I've only heard the 5th and 6th all the way through once. His 9th is awesome, as well. Some stuff by Wagner and the Mighty Handful composers is great, too.

The trouble with Wagner is that- well... he was Wagner. If you bring it down to the composers themselves, you end up with, at the far ends of the spectrum, Beethoven, who was an Enlightenment thinker and composed his major pieces about triumph over adversity, the defeat of oppression, the aquisition of universal civil rights, and, of course, the ninth: brotherhood, versus Wagner, who was a disgusting anti-semite, so much so that he became Hitler's favorite and came to symbolize Naziism. A big difference there...

The heavy Tschakovsky music - cannons for instruments in live performances. Brilliant.

It's performed anually where I live, and it's always funny to watch the people who thought the cannons where just a war display as they leap terrified into the air while a ball of fire shoots thirty feet through the crowd. I've never been able to stop myslef from laughing. Sadly, it's that cruel evil laugh...

Also...hmm...
Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries

You know, historians think that Richard Wagner my actually have been the lover (Don't make me define that.) of King Ludwig II of Bavaria. I see who's riding the Valkyrie now...

400 posts! Yesss! I'm moving up!

You know, historians think that Richard Wagner my actually have been the lover (Don't make me define that.) of King Ludwig II of Bavaria. I see who's riding the Valkyrie now...

I don't care why he wrote it or what he wrote it about, it's a fantastic piece of music.

Btw maybe quote more than one person per post? It looks a little spammy replying 8 times in a row ;)

The trouble with Wagner is that- well... he was Wagner. If you bring it down to the composers themselves, you end up with, at the far ends of the spectrum, Beethoven, who was an Enlightenment thinker and composed his major pieces about triumph over adversity, the defeat of oppression, the aquisition of universal civil rights, and, of course, the ninth: brotherhood, versus Wagner, who was a disgusting anti-semite, so much so that he became Hitler's favorite and came to symbolize Naziism. A big difference there...

Oh, Wagner was unquestionably an ass, but he also unquestionably wrote some truly phenomenal music. I would have no interest in being Wagner's friend, but why should that have any impact on my opinion of him as a composer?

I don't care why he wrote it or what he wrote it about, it's a fantastic piece of music.

Btw maybe quote more than one person per post? It looks a little spammy replying 8 times in a row ;)

Yeah, I know; it does. I was hoping I'd be able to revive this thread by getting attention to it. You can tell I'm heading into politics... Ugh.

By the way, I agree it's a very good piece of music, I just can't get over Wagner's antisemitism.

Oh, Wagner was unquestionably an ass, but he also unquestionably wrote some truly phenomenal music. I would have no interest in being Wagner's friend, but why should that have any impact on my opinion of him as a composer?

I see. People have always told me I should do the same; I've just always had trouble seperating a person from their work. As an architectural madman (fanatic is not strong enough), that sort of thing would almost be enough to stop me from feeling so magnifacently about La Cuesta Encantada (gnerally known as Hearst Castle), except it was designed by Julia Morgan, not Hearst, and Morgan was an architectural genious.

O Fortuna FTW!

The heavy Tschakovsky music - cannons for instruments in live performances. Brilliant.

Beethoven did it too: The Battle of Vitoria.

AS for my favourite....impossible.

Tchaikovsky's 1812, Beethoven's 9th mvmt 4, Camille Saint-Saëns Third Symphony for Organ (One of the most majestic pieces I have ever heard)

Pachelbel's Canon in D

Beautiful piece, but you can only listen to that when you're in the mood for it.


Bach's Prelude to Partitia Number 3 in E Major is a great violin solo piece.

However, even the modern classical writers are excellent to listen to (most, anyways). My two favourites of those have to be Holsinger and Gustav Holst.

I like anything by Mozart.

Chopin's "Heroic" Polonaise as played by Arthur Rubinstein. I also am a huge Wagner fan.

The trouble with Wagner is that- well... he was Wagner. If you bring it down to the composers themselves, you end up with, at the far ends of the spectrum, Beethoven, who was an Enlightenment thinker and composed his major pieces about triumph over adversity, the defeat of oppression, the aquisition of universal civil rights, and, of course, the ninth: brotherhood, versus Wagner, who was a disgusting anti-semite, so much so that he became Hitler's favorite and came to symbolize Naziism. A big difference there...

Yeah, I know. I actually stayed away from Wagner for a long time for just that reason, but later I realized that was a mistake. Henry Ford was an anti-semite, too, but you wouldn't throw out a Ford truck for that reason, I assume. Keep in mind that Schoenberg and Mahler were both Jewish and yet they recognized the importance of Wagner's music, as well.

You know, historians think that Richard Wagner my actually have been the lover (Don't make me define that.) of King Ludwig II of Bavaria. I see who's riding the Valkyrie now...

Hmm, that's the first time I've seen this theory.

would you love a mosterman.

Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor, naturally
Beethoven's Ninth, Fifth, and others.
Mussorgsky's Night on Bald Mountain
Stravinsky's Firebird

...and other's I can't recall.

Yeah, I know; it does. I was hoping I'd be able to revive this thread by getting attention to it. You can tell I'm heading into politics... Ugh.

By the way, I agree it's a very good piece of music, I just can't get over Wagner's antisemitism.

If it helps, remember that compared to many people of his times Wagner wasn't especially anti-semitic. Oh, there's no question that he disliked jews, but there's a fair amount of evidence that some or all of the vitriol against them attributed to Wagner was either misinterpretation of his actual comments, or posthumous attempts to blacken his name - he scandalized the society of his day and embarrassed a lot of powerful people and organizations, after all.

I don't honestly care. Michaelangelo was apparently a pain in the neck and imossible to work with, doesn't stop me appreciating the Sistine Chapel.

Probably Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture.

If it helps, remember that compared to many people of his times Wagner wasn't especially anti-semitic. Oh, there's no question that he disliked jews, but there's a fair amount of evidence that some or all of the vitriol against them attributed to Wagner was either misinterpretation of his actual comments, or posthumous attempts to blacken his name - he scandalized the society of his day and embarrassed a lot of powerful people and organizations, after all.

I dunno, he did write "Jews in Music", a polemic against, obviously, Jews in music. He seems to have been the Mel Gibson of his day (only much more talented). Personally, I want to know where Congressional Dimwits heard that Wagner and King Ludwig II were in a homoerotic relationship. That's the first time I've seen that claim...

Well, as a trumpet player, I would have to say that my favorite classical piece is the Hummel Trumpet concerto, which next to the Haydn, was one of the few pieces written for trumpet in the Classical period. As far as musical tastes go, I am not as much of a fan of Baroque and Classical as I am of Romantic music. Romantic music utilizes dynamics, meter changes, accelerando, rubato, extended chords, and many other expressive tools much more than classical or baroque music. I love Holst's Planet suite especially Jupiter, Mars, and Venus. I also love his First Suite in Eb for Military Band. Also, I enjoy some jazz music, Louie Armstrong, Miles Davis, John Coltrane.

If it fits under the umbrella of "classical" music, I would have to say that some of my favorite pieces of "classical" music are a few trumpet sonatas of the 20th century, namely, the Hindimeth, the Kennan, and the Halsey Stevens.

Mars I also love his First Suite in Eb for Military Band.

Last year, our Orchestra played Mars, and our Symphonic Winds group played First Suite (I am a tympanist, so Mars was fun, though repetitive, and First Suite is a beautiful piece, but I was bored)

Johannes brahms's 5. hungarian dance.