Who is the greater Piano Composer: Chopin or Beethoven

[King Stephen]

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?

I think to some degree all of the above come into play when talking greatness in regards to a composer.
Awhile back I read on this site a post
by a person who did not like Dvorak. Well, if we go back in time Dvorak was a highly respected composer by no less than Brahms and Tchaikovsky. Does this make the person who dose not like Dvorak, and I believe refered to him as a "hack", any less knowledgeable than you or I, absolutely not. That is certainly his privilege and I respect his veiw, but I don't agree with it. Dvorak, according to Tovey, is one of the best to come out of the middle to late romantic period. I for one find his music to be astounding. Was he and is he Great? To me he was, to my friend he wasn't
We could go on with this until the sun burns out and not have a conclusive agreement on greatness. We all have our favorites and I am sure we consider a good portion of them great. Can we say "Greatness" is in the ears of the beholder?

[Gurn Blanston]

King,
I must have missed that post, else I would have been on it like a duck on a junebug! Dvorak a hack? He was the last great composer. His death 100 years ago this year marks for me the end of the era of great music, an era that began with Bach and Vivaldi and ended with Tchaikovsky and Dvorak. He wrote great music in every genre, which is the hallmark of the really great composers.
Now, there are hacks out there, and some of them are much loved, but we are not naming names here, and Dvorak is definitely not in their number. If you see that person again, send him/her to me, please!


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

[Peter]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
King,
I must have missed that post, else I would have been on it like a duck on a junebug! Dvorak a hack? He was the last great composer. His death 100 years ago this year marks for me the end of the era of great music, an era that began with Bach and Vivaldi and ended with Tchaikovsky and Dvorak. He wrote great music in every genre, which is the hallmark of the really great composers.
Now, there are hacks out there, and some of them are much loved, but we are not naming names here, and Dvorak is definitely not in their number. If you see that person again, send him/her to me, please!

There was great music before Bach!

Purcell, Palestrina, Byrd, Monteverdi, Josquin to name just a few.

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

[urtextmeister]

Originally posted by King Stephen:
I think to some degree all of the above come into play when talking greatness in regards to a composer.
Awhile back I read on this site a post
by a person who did not like Dvorak. Well, if we go back in time Dvorak was a highly respected composer by no less than Brahms and Tchaikovsky. Does this make the person who dose not like Dvorak, and I believe refered to him as a "hack", any less knowledgeable than you or I, absolutely not. That is certainly his privilege and I respect his veiw, but I don't agree with it. Dvorak, according to Tovey, is one of the best to come out of the middle to late romantic period. I for one find his music to be astounding. Was he and is he Great? To me he was, to my friend he wasn't
We could go on with this until the sun burns out and not have a conclusive agreement on greatness. We all have our favorites and I am sure we consider a good portion of them great. Can we say "Greatness" is in the ears of the beholder?

I disagree slightly. The one who said Dvorak is a hack is not necessarily less intelligent than us, but he or she probably is.
In any field of endeavor, there are experts--those who devout their life to the study of the subject. If you are a musicologist or a professional classical musician or involved in classical music in some other capacity other than occasional listener, you just don't go around calling Dvorak a hack. It is irresponsible and there is no way to back such a statement up. You can point out shortcomings in his music, you can find some minor works and show how they are weak compared to other works in the same era and genre, but you can't hold up one of the great symphonies and say, "this is a worthless piece of fluff."
You just can't.
If you do, you are either aiming for shock value or you speak from ignorance.

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by Peter:
There was great music before Bach!

Purcell, Palestrina, Byrd, Monteverdi, Josquin to name just a few.

Peter,
Yes, you are absolutely correct. However, in response to the trend that this thread has taken I have only listed composers that I like I'm not all that keen on "Middle Baroque" and going backwards, thus they are not "great". I am presenting an object lesson in subjectivity!


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

[urtextmeister]

Originally posted by Sorrano:
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.

There are many great interpreters of Chopin. I can't say I have ever heard Barenboim play Chopin. I know him to be a great overal musician, but his Chopin might not be to every's taste.
I think Rubinstein is Granddaddy of them all. The voicing, the subtle nuance. He brings out all of the expression but is never sentimental or excessive.
Argerich performances. Wow! Fiery passion. There is a recording of the first etude from around the time of her Chopin competition victory. It is simply impossible to play like that. One of the most brilliant things I have ever heard. The Bb minor sonata is not my favorite performance but very interesting.
As far as the nocturnes go, I had a recording as child with Peter Katin. This was the most dreamy, soft, delicate stuff. I think it many ways he captured the essence of Chopin. Every thing you read about Chopin talks about his manner of playing being delicate, soft, subtle.
I don't how many nocturnes Dinu Lipatti recorded, but I have the Db and it is absolutely gorgeous.
Ashkenazy, Garrick Ohlssohn, Pollini. This would be a start. There are many wonderful recordings of Chopin.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you said improvisatory quality. There is freedom that one needs to play Chopin. It is similar to Schumann. You can't play these composers straight. But all of the rubato has to hearfelt and logical, not arbitrary.
I guess that's enough Chopin talk on this site devoted to the Great One (all bow please).

[King Stephen]

Originally posted by urtextmeister:
I disagree slightly. The one who said Dvorak is a hack is not necessarily less intelligent than us, but he or she probably is.
In any field of endeavor, there are experts--those who devout their life to the study of the subject. If you are a musicologist or a professional classical musician or involved in classical music in some other capacity other than occasional listener, you just don't go around calling Dvorak a hack. It is irresponsible and there is no way to back such a statement up. You can point out shortcomings in his music, you can find some minor works and show how they are weak compared to other works in the same era and genre, but you can't hold up one of the great symphonies and say, "this is a worthless piece of fluff."
You just can't.
If you do, you are either aiming for shock value or you speak from ignorance.

I agree with you 100% but that dosn't stop people from making such rash statments
I think when a person says
that "Dvorak was a hack", in all probability they mean they don't like Dvorak. So be it, they are the losers. Antonin and I share the same bithday (Not the year) so I look upon him as my patron composer so to speak. I could say anybody who dislikes Dvorak's music has dead insects between their ears, but I won't.

[King Stephen]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
King,
I must have missed that post, else I would have been on it like a duck on a junebug! Dvorak a hack? He was the last great composer. His death 100 years ago this year marks for me the end of the era of great music, an era that began with Bach and Vivaldi and ended with Tchaikovsky and Dvorak. He wrote great music in every genre, which is the hallmark of the really great composers.
Now, there are hacks out there, and some of them are much loved, but we are not naming names here, and Dvorak is definitely not in their number. If you see that person again, send him/her to me, please!

Gurn, Forgive me the quote about Dvorak being a hack was not a post but was made verbally to me by a person who was trying to show his knowledge about classical music.

[spaceray]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:

"Middle Baroque" and going backwards, thus they are not "great".

Gurn,
Hey are you calling MY favorite composer'backward" !Put em up ,put em up.
space

[Peter]

Originally posted by Gurn Blanston:
Peter,
Yes, you are absolutely correct. However, in response to the trend that this thread has taken I have only listed composers that I like I'm not all that keen on "Middle Baroque" and going backwards, thus they are not "great". I am presenting an object lesson in subjectivity!

Well I understand your reluctance with earlier music but this I think is a language problem - our ears are so conditioned to the major/minor system that it is hard to adapt to the barer sounds of modal harmony. To medieval ears the major 3rd and 6th were regarded as dissonant intervals and mathematically this can be shown to be so (the 4th,5th and octave are the purest intervals), however we regard them as the most harmonious!



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

[Shane]

Originally posted by Sorrano:
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.

May i suggest evgeny kissin, vladimir ashkenazy (though he is not my favourite chopin player), maurizio pollini ( he is good), maria tipo (her recording of the nocturnes is great), artur rubinstin (probably my favourite), claudio arrau, murray pariah, vladimir horowitz.

Shane

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by Shane:
May i suggest evgeny kissin, vladimir ashkenazy (though he is not my favourite chopin player), maurizio pollini ( he is good), maria tipo (her recording of the nocturnes is great), artur rubinstin (probably my favourite), claudio arrau, murray pariah, vladimir horowitz.

Shane

I also have Elisabeth Leonskaja playing the Polonaises (my favorites), and they are a splendid performance and recorded sound too.




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

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by spaceray:
Gurn,
Hey are you calling MY favorite composer'backward" !Put em up ,put em up.
space

Space,
Does the fact that your favorite composer is backward say more about you than it does about him?



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

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by King Stephen:
Gurn, Forgive me the quote about Dvorak being a hack was not a post but was made verbally to me by a person who was trying to show his knowledge about classical music.

King,
And he DID show you the depth of his knowledge, eh?



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

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by Peter:
Well I understand your reluctance with earlier music but this I think is a language problem - our ears are so conditioned to the major/minor system that it is hard to adapt to the barer sounds of modal harmony. To medieval ears the major 3rd and 6th were regarded as dissonant intervals and mathematically this can be shown to be so (the 4th,5th and octave are the purest intervals), however we regard them as the most harmonious!

Peter,
I know you are correct about that, but it is hard to compensate with intellect for what my ears have let me down. You know, when we read the now either hilarious or ghastly reviews by B's contemporaries, this is exactly what they were complaining about with his music; they were used to hearing certain sounds and they were euphonious because they were conditioned to them and expected to hear them. When B gave them something different, it was jarring. Or when Mozart sent out the parts to K 465 (the quartet "Dissonance") and the players sent them back fearing there had been some frightful mistake! All in what you're used to, I guess.


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