Who is the greater Piano Composer: Chopin or Beethoven

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by King Stephen:
To even compare Chopin to Beethoven is blasphamy. A word in your story, I personally think sums up Fryderyk Chopin's muisc, that is music to be played in the "salon". Forgive me my friends but to compare Beethoven, who it has been said played the piano like he was possessed, and who composed for solo instruments as well as for orchestra to Chopin who composed better than 95% of his music for solo piano is a bit outlandish. Because Chopin muisc is popular does not put him on a plain with LvB.
I guess it goes without saying I am not a lover of Chopin.....Sorry.

King,
Yes, well of course on an overall basis you are perfectly correct. But he was just talking about piano music actually, so it's a fair question. One needn't be a lover of any composer to be able to acknowledge his/her greatness though. I readily will jump right out and say "Chopin? yes indeed, second best composer for piano out there", and yet I have only a few of his works, and am particularly fond of the Polonaises, which even his fans never seem to point out as his better works. But he is not chopped liver after all. That would be...


------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[King Stephen]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
King,
Yes, well of course on an overall basis you are perfectly correct. But he was just talking about piano music actually, so it's a fair question. One needn't be a lover of any composer to be able to acknowledge his/her greatness though. I readily will jump right out and say "Chopin? yes indeed, second best composer for piano out there", and yet I have only a few of his works, and am particularly fond of the Polonaises, which even his fans never seem to point out as his better works. But he is not chopped liver after all. That would be...

We could go on forever about this. Again, I do not consider Chopin in my top 25 list. Chopped liver or not he never did nor will he appeal to me. My hat is of to those of you who like him. Indeed you make a good argument for Chopin but I would not rank him "Second" to Beethoven when it comes to piano music. It is wonderful that in this forum we can express ourselves in a way, that I hope, offends no one. If we all agreed on the same thing, what a dull world it would be. One thing more, if a composer is not appealing to a person, then how would he or she ackowledge his greatness? I do not have a strong liking for Mahler but many, many people do and in so doing would probably acknowledge his greatness. My question is do I , who care very little for his music, have to say he was a great composer?

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by King Stephen:
We could go on forever about this. Again, I do not consider Chopin in my top 25 list. Chopped liver or not he never did nor will he appeal to me. My hat is of to those of you who like him. Indeed you make a good argument for Chopin but I would not rank him "Second" to Beethoven when it comes to piano music. It is wonderful that in this forum we can express ourselves in a way, that I hope, offends no one. If we all agreed on the same thing, what a dull world it would be. One thing more, if a composer is not appealing to a person, then how would he or she ackowledge his greatness? I do not have a strong liking for Mahler but many, many people do and in so doing would probably acknowledge his greatness. My question is do I , who care very little for his music, have to say he was a great composer?

King,
Well, no, we agree about Mahler, thus he need not be acknowledged. Oh, all right, that's probably not right . But seriously, there are a lot of composers that are certainly more than competent, if not great, and their greatness does not depend on whether I or you or any other large or small group of people like them or not. You would be surprised to know the number of people who can't tolerate Beethoven, or who think that Mozart actually IS chopped liver (even excepting Rodney, there are actually others). And I can't believe that every person who loves Wagner is a total idiot either, although he doesn't appeal to me at all (well, maybe Ride of the Valkyries if I have had a bottle or two of Rhine Wine). So, I can make the concession because I know the title of "great" is conferred by history and knowledgeable people over time. I can live with it, but I don't have to make a huge investment in Chopin or Mahler CD's, do I? Not that I don't have thousands invested in Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven...



------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Beyond Within:
I just want to know your thoughts on this....

In comparing the various piano works, smaller to greater of Beethoven's to Chopin's I see more depth and involvement in Beethoven's--from the simple bagatelles to the variations and finally to the sonatas. One once compared the Bach Well Tempered Clavier to the Old Testament and the Beethoven Sonatas to the New Testament. I like that comparison, myself.

[Shane]

Originally posted by King Stephen:
We could go on forever about this. Again, I do not consider Chopin in my top 25 list. Chopped liver or not he never did nor will he appeal to me. My hat is of to those of you who like him. Indeed you make a good argument for Chopin but I would not rank him "Second" to Beethoven when it comes to piano music. It is wonderful that in this forum we can express ourselves in a way, that I hope, offends no one. If we all agreed on the same thing, what a dull world it would be. One thing more, if a composer is not appealing to a person, then how would he or she ackowledge his greatness? I do not have a strong liking for Mahler but many, many people do and in so doing would probably acknowledge his greatness. My question is do I , who care very little for his music, have to say he was a great composer?

King,

may i please recommend a few of my personal favorites of chopin to you? i have only been interested in chopin for a couple of years after i heard some of his works, so this might change your mind about him as a composer, i hope.
polonaise op 53 (heroic)
sonata no 2, one with funeral march
rain drop prelude
etude op 10 no 3
etude op 10 no 12 (revolutionary)
etude op 25 no 11 (winter wind)
ballade op 23 (no. 1, in g minor)
fantasy impromptu
waltz no 1. (grande waltz brilliant)
piano concerto no 2, in f minor, 2nd movment especially!

the above are just some of the great works of chopin and some of my very favorites. hopefully you may be able obtain these played by claudio arrau, artur rubinstin or evgeny kissin. they are my personal favourite interpreters of chopin. hope you enjoy the music!

Shane

[urtextmeister]

Responding to the trend this conversation was taking a couple of posts back:

I see the value of personal preference, but this discussion seems a little overcome by it!
I will admit there are a few composers that I have a little trouble warming up to. Hindemith sometimes leaves me cold. I appreciate the craftsmanship of his music, but his whole approach seems a bit safe and bland. Some Grieg chamber music strikes me as trite and overblown. I do, however, play and study music by these composers frequently and I always strive for a deeper understanding. Contemporary composers often miss the mark, but I think they always deserve a chance and that means playing them the best I can or listening with an open mind.

I don't think we should assume that all classical music is great. Some of it is simply better than rest of it. However, I think you miss out if you dismiss a composer such as Wagner or Mahler or Chopin (or worse a whole era) and have nothing to do with him.

Chopin was a great composer. He wrote some of the most profound and poetic music ever written for the piano. I have attended many piano recitals since my childhood and Chopin is almost always on the program. Requirements for contests and auditions if they specify composers are usually: Bach P and F, Beethoven sonata, and major piece by Chopin. I suppose you could make the case that popularity is not an indication of greatness. I don't think that is valid.

Britney Spears is popular. Chopin is esteemed. A granite fixture in piano repertoire.

Maybe if one were to compare one of the great sonatas of Chopin with a late Beethoven sonata, Beethoven would come out on top. That is very difficult to say, especially since the era and style are different.

It is, however, easy to say that Chopin was a great composer and understood the instrument he was writing for as much as anyone ever has. If you say he was a very good composer, I would disagree and insist on great. If you say he was a poor composer I would say you need to take another listen.

By the way, I am not polish.

[King Stephen]

Ok! my friends I surrender. I will concede one most important fact and that is most of you love Chopin. Be that as it may I don't ,and in all probability won't. There is so much music to listen to, I am sure you will agree, that after hearing a composer for a time you will come up with the conclusion that you either like or dislike his or her music, you will in all probability keep listening or go on to some thing else . The list you suggested for me to listen to Shane I have heard many times. We talk about greatness. What does it mean? In Beethoven's time Johann Nepomuk Hummel was considerd by many to be Beethovens equal not only at the piano but in composition. Alas, where is Hummel today, almost all but forgoten. I think greatness of a composer, to a certain extent, lies within the love of that composer by the listner. I for one love the music of Hummel, his piano concertos are a fashion after Mozart. His pieces for solo piano are super (To me). And I hear both Haydn and Beethoven in his Masses. But in reality it is still Hummel. So my friends I know what it is like to try to persuade someone to like music that I like, I've been doing it for over fifty years. I am certain that one of you will suggest a composer or a piece of music that will get my blood flowing hot. I am sorry if I offend you but Chopin is not on my list of great composers.

[This message has been edited by King Stephen (edited March 05, 2004).]

[Gurn Blanston]

King,
And why stop with Hummel, since we are back in the Late Classical & Earliest Romantic? I happen to be quite partial to Clementi, who's story sounds eerily similar in many respects to J.N.H.'s, but the converts I have made are few and far between. What does it matter after all? We shan't come to blows over it anyway. BTW, I really like Paganini too, so take that!!


------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Peter]

Originally posted by King Stephen:
Ok! my friends I surrender. I will concede one most important fact and that is most of you love Chopin. Be that as it may I don't ,and in all probability won't. There is so much music to listen to, I am sure you will agree, that after hearing a composer for a time you will come up with the conclusion that you either like or dislike his or her music, you will in all probability keep listening or go on to some thing else . The list you suggested for me to listen to Shane I have heard many times. We talk about greatness. What does it mean? In Beethoven's time Johann Nepomuk Hummel was considerd by many to be Beethovens equal not only at the piano but in composition. Alas, where is Hummel today, almost all but forgoten. I think greatness of a composer, to a certain extent, lies within the love of that composer by the listner. I for one love the music of Hummel, his piano concertos are a fashion after Mozart. His pieces for solo piano are super (To me). And I hear both Haydn and Beethoven in his Masses. But in reality it is still Hummel. So my friends I know what it is like to try to persuade someone to like music that I like, I've been doing it for over fifty years. I am certain that one of you will suggest a composer or a piece of music that will get my blood flowing hot. I am sorry if I offend you but Chopin is not on my list of great composers.

[This message has been edited by King Stephen (edited March 05, 2004).]

I agree with you about Hummel - he is a fine composer (not in the first division)and though I only have a small selection of his music, his B minor and A minor piano concertos are quite as fine as Chopin's. It is strange that he is so neglected.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[King Stephen]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
King,
And why stop with Hummel, since we are back in the Late Classical & Earliest Romantic? I happen to be quite partial to Clementi, who's story sounds eerily similar in many respects to J.N.H.'s, but the converts I have made are few and far between. What does it matter after all? We shan't come to blows over it anyway. BTW, I really like Paganini too, so take that!!

Gurn, You are a man I would like to shake hands with. We seem to share at least the same feelings about the so called "lesser" composers. You are so right when you say "What does it all matter after All?"
We are all in the same boat so to speak, we all love classical music, and thats what really matters. By the way I find the music of Mehul,Cherubini,Pleyel,and Gossec just to name a few, to be very pleasant listening. No Beethovens here but then there is only one Beethoven.

[This message has been edited by King Stephen (edited March 06, 2004).]

[urtextmeister]

I thought King Steven's remarks were very eloquent. I did not mean to attack anyone's personal preferences. My only point was that we should acknowledge Chopin's contributions while maybe not personally embracing his music.
I am not very familiar with Hummel's music except for some chamber music and trumpet concerto, but I mean to explore this composer now that I have such excellent recommendations.
All of this brings up a very important question (maybe we need to start a new thread on this sometime): what is greatness and who determines it? Is it based on a composer's music alone? The impact they have had? Is it, to some degree, a popularity contest?

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by King Stephen:
Gurn, You are a man I would like to shake hands with. We seem to share at least the same feelings about the so called "lesser" composers. You are so right when you say "What does it all matter after All?"
We are all in the same boat so to speak, we all love classical music, and thats what really matters. By the way I find the music of Mehul,Cherubini,Pleyel,and Gossec just to name a few, to be very pleasant listening. No Beethovens here but then there is only one Beethoven.

[This message has been edited by King Stephen (edited March 06, 2004).]

King,
Well, back at'cha, my friend. I would say that the composers that you have listed there are certainly intriguing to me, I have not been exposed to their music. It is not that I have intentionally or otherwise ignored it, there simply is so little of it out there to acquire. I was absolutely delighted to find the disk of Clementi sonatas on Ebay one afternoon, and if I saw Pleyel, Dittersdorf, Vanhal, Hummel, or half a dozen others of that time out there, I would snap them up too. I find it vastly amusing that people expose themselves to post-modern crap (let's call it what it is) in the name of needing some new music to listen to, they're tired of the old stuff, when in fact there ar 100's of composers to listen to without ever leaving the Classical or Early Romantic Eras. And if you already like Haydn/Mozart/Beethoven/Schubert, then how can you go wrong with Spohr, for example? BTW, I like Rossini, too, have at you!




------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by urtextmeister:
All of this brings up a very important question (maybe we need to start a new thread on this sometime): what is greatness and who determines it? Is it based on a composer's music alone? The impact they have had? Is it, to some degree, a popularity contest?

Urt,
I think you are right about a new thread, but I'll just give my 2 cents whilst I am here; Too use Beethoven as an example, if it was a popularity contest his name would not have outlived him! He wsa not popular or well-liked in the least, but he was respected by one and all because of his obvious mastery of music-making, even though the style itself had already outlived its popularity! There certainly are great composers who were popular in their lifetime (Haydn is the best example I can think of, he was an idol of the public, and a god to other composers of the time, an oddity for such an unassuming man!), but many of the most popular in their time have not been dubbed great by history (our Hummel is a good example). One could make a list (and check it twice ) of all composers now considered great and those who are not, and compare them to their reception when they were alive, but I fear fistfights would break out over the very basic definition of greatness, should Liszt be on the list? Schumann? Vieuxtemps, then? Of course, we could let Rod draw up the list, and it would only have two names, which would make the task so much easier


------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[This message has been edited by Gurn Blanston (edited March 06, 2004).]

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by urtextmeister:
I thought King Steven's remarks were very eloquent. I did not mean to attack anyone's personal preferences. My only point was that we should acknowledge Chopin's contributions while maybe not personally embracing his music.
I am not very familiar with Hummel's music except for some chamber music and trumpet concerto, but I mean to explore this composer now that I have such excellent recommendations.
All of this brings up a very important question (maybe we need to start a new thread on this sometime): what is greatness and who determines it? Is it based on a composer's music alone? The impact they have had? Is it, to some degree, a popularity contest?

Unfortunately, many of my experiences with Chopin are negative. (Poor performaners and my own difficulty with his music add to my negativity.) However, I did "discover" the mazurkas and have enjoyed playing them immensly. But the question I have is who is the best interpreter? I picked up a Barenboim interpretation of the nocturnes and was terribly disappointed.

I love the improvisational ideas that are prevalent in his music but I cannot play them.

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by urtextmeister:
I thought King Steven's remarks were very eloquent. I did not mean to attack anyone's personal preferences. My only point was that we should acknowledge Chopin's contributions while maybe not personally embracing his music.
I am not very familiar with Hummel's music except for some chamber music and trumpet concerto, but I mean to explore this composer now that I have such excellent recommendations.
All of this brings up a very important question (maybe we need to start a new thread on this sometime): what is greatness and who determines it? Is it based on a composer's music alone? The impact they have had? Is it, to some degree, a popularity contest?

Unfortunately, many of my experiences with Chopin are negative. (Poor performaners and my own difficulty with his music add to my negativity.) However, I did "discover" the mazurkas and have enjoyed playing them immensly. But the question I have is who is the best interpreter? I picked up a Barenboim interpretation of the nocturnes and was terribly disappointed.

I love the improvisational ideas that are prevalent in his music but I cannot play them.