Who is the Greatest composer after Beethoven?

The new world symph. is mainly famous because of where the composer drew inspiration from; I love dvorak's style of composing with short musical motifs and the like they are a blast!

Try to keep some sensible debate going, with reasons for your statements etc.

Don't just bitterly oppose the other's opinion, and tell him he's wrong.

Let's keep this mature.

(and no swearing, please! :) )

Any viewpoint regarding the quality of anything, on absolutely any grounds, is subjective.

Dvorak is second rate, he's barely a Rachmaninoff though one step above Saint-Saens.

It's interesting to read your "opinion" on composers. It's almost as though you have more musical knowledge than anyone else.

Your "rating" of Dvorak, and the "comparison" to Rachmaninov is simply a evidence that you actually DON'T have all that much understanding of the repertoire.

So from your statement we are to take it that Rachmaninov is a 2nd rate compsoers. Please, fill us in on your credentials for making this sort of sweeping grand pronouncement? Where did you get your musicology degree?

It's interesting to read your "opinion" on composers. It's almost as though you have more musical knowledge than anyone else.

Your "rating" of Dvorak, and the "comparison" to Rachmaninov is simply a evidence that you actually DON'T have all that much understanding of the repertoire.

So from your statement we are to take it that Rachmaninov is a 2nd rate compsoers. Please, fill us in on your credentials for making this sort of sweeping grand pronouncement? Where did you get your musicology degree?

C'mon Michel, don't be so tough on the little guy, maybe it is a 13 year old. Imagine if he is shitting his pants with fear :laugh:

P.S I know he is 20, but yeah :P

I must say that I really enjoy Jean Sibelius works, but I do not know if I can call him the greatest.

Well let's agree on one thing:

Any composer who is dead for many years and any composer alive who deals with classical music, of his era, or of any era, and is able to get plenty of performances, be published, be played and recorded and sold to make millions of $ is great!

Want examples?

Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Clementi (yes, his books sell a lot! Especially to young age), Mendy, Rossini, Verdi, Stravinsky, Dvorak, Bartok, Ligeti, Stockhausen, Xenakis, Takemitsu, Schostackovich, Mahler, Brahms and the list goes on for another 50-100 names.

From this forum how many had their pieces performed professionally? 2-5 members in all, I say. From an amateur/student ensemble? 10-50 I say! Now how many of all the members in here, who are SO arrogant and are able to tell great from greater and bad from worst have any of their pieces published? I remember 1 name! Self published? Hmm... maybe 5 in all?

Now before you go on, just shut up (the equivelant to shuting up on the Internet would be to stop and actually think) and think how loving hard it is to do what all these composers, outside of your own taste did and have accomplished!

Now by all means this is fun and this thread should be fun. But my idea for fun is not bashing on any composer, alive or dead.

:(

Well let's agree on one thing:

Any composer who is dead for many years and any composer alive who deals with classical music, of his era, or of any era, and is able to get plenty of performances, be published, be played and recorded and sold to make millions of $ is great!

Want examples?

Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Clementi (yes, his books sell a lot! Especially to young age), Mendy, Rossini, Verdi, Stravinsky, Dvorak, Bartok, Ligeti, Stockhausen, Xenakis, Takemitsu, Schostackovich, Mahler, Brahms and the list goes on for another 50-100 names.

From this forum how many had their pieces performed professionally? 2-5 members in all, I say. From an amateur/student ensemble? 10-50 I say! Now how many of all the members in here, who are SO arrogant and are able to tell great from greater and bad from worst have any of their pieces published? I remember 1 name! Self published? Hmm... maybe 5 in all?

Now before you go on, just shut up (the equivelant to shuting up on the Internet would be to stop and actually think) and think how loving hard it is to do what all these composers, outside of your own taste did and have accomplished!

Now by all means this is fun and this thread should be fun. But my idea for fun is not bashing on any composer, alive or dead.

:(

I wish you could put those words in my mouth :P

I fully agree with you.

I've been holding back on discussion in this thread, but I'm afraid you're all just so damned ignorant I have to set you straight.

And you can quote me on this:

I, Daniel, am the greatest composer before, since, and including Beethoven.

Although I wasn't around before or during Beethoven's time, my mastery of all forms of music, including the morris dance, and my general talent and skill set me on a pedestal above all others. And my mastery of instrumental writing, especially saxophone, and accordion, have led my music to be adored by performers around the world.

But please continue with your moot discussion.

If you want a break from this irrelevant drivel, you could have a listen to my new kazoo concerto.

I'm gonna go ahead and agree with Sir Violinist and say that in the Romantic Era, Gustav Mahler was the greatest composer, followed closely by Wagner and then Brahms. While Mahler is not my favorite Romantic composer (that actually goes to Dvorak) his originality and pure artistic genius can't be overstated. He helped usher in the twentieth century and expanded tonality in a way that most had never even concieved. Wagner comes in second because he laid a lot of the framework needed to dissolve functional harmony and Brahms comes in third because I think he perfected the tonal symphony (that is not to say that Brahms was not harmonically intriguing and did not break some conventions, just that when comparing his music to Mahler or Wagner, his is much more conservative.)

As for Dvorak, who is my favorite composer of all time, saying that the Ninth symphony is poor is incredibly ignorant. Each movement is a gem and his use of monothematicism is brilliant. Saying that the New World Symphony is his only known piece is also incredibly ignorant. His seventh and eighth symphonies are also wideply played (and in my opinion, better than the ninth) as is his Slavonic Dances. His cello concerto is standard repertoire (prompting Brahms to say "Had I known that one could write a cello concerto like this, I would have written one long ago!") In the chamber music world, his string quartets are widely performed.

Oh wow, the New World Symphony. Yes, us fresh faced musical novices have never heard this piece.

*YAWN*

Of course I've heard Dvorak 9, which itself isn't even that good compared to every other symphony from that era. I'll admit that's a very subjective opinion on my part, but I'm sure others would be inclined to agree. Of course the 2nd movement is quite pretty

I agree with everything in this post. Brahms was definitely a genius. First rate composer, Dvorak is second rate, he's barely a Rachmaninoff though one step above Saint-Saens.

I didnt mean to bring Dvoark into this whole thing, thats why I edited my post becasue I realized that was just my bias opinion. I love Dvorak!! I think his music is just fantastic, not as good as Mahler or whatever, but its really good. I think if you took a few minutes and listened to some other works by Dvorak beside the 9th symphony, you might see what I love. Or I might just be the stupid-know nothing-vocal major-compoer-with bad taste in music.

I didnt mean to bring Dvoark into this whole thing, thats why I edited my post becasue I realized that was just my bias opinion. I love Dvorak!! I think his music is just fantastic, not as good as Mahler or whatever, but its really good. I think if you took a few minutes and listened to some other works by Dvorak beside the 9th symphony, you might see what I love. Or I might just be the stupid-know nothing-vocal major-compoer-with bad taste in music.

I've heard Dvorak 8 and 9, the Slavonic Dances, string quartets and other various pieces. I don't base my opinion of a composer on one piece, that's silly.

Tenor10, there is no reason to say that you have poor taste in music. Dvorak is a master, and even if he wasn't, if you like him, that's no one's business but your own. Everyone has music that they like that a lot of people who "know about music" frown upon, but that's no reason not to like it. Unless it's Linkin Park. God I hate Linkin Park. :)

But as for Dvorak, he's one of the masters, one of the best orchestrators of all time and easily the most influential European nationalist composer.

Thank you.

There are number of problems with making judgements about which composers are "masters" and which are "second rate".

First and foremost, is the general musical kowledge of the person making the judgement. I hear a lot of people with pretty rudimentary muscial training making this srot of grand pronouncements. More often than not, they're simply parroting statements they've read elsewhere, without actually understanding how or why the original author came to that conclusion.

There is also the simple fact that musicologists never agree 100% on issues of "worth" of various composers. You can just as easily read two different musicological treatise on the same composer, with both espousing diametrically opposing views.

I'm gonna go ahead and agree with Sir Violinist and say that in the Romantic Era, Gustav Mahler was the greatest composer, followed closely by Wagner and then Brahms. While Mahler is not my favorite Romantic composer (that actually goes to Dvorak) his originality and pure artistic genius can't be overstated. He helped usher in the twentieth century and expanded tonality in a way that most had never even concieved. Wagner comes in second because he laid a lot of the framework needed to dissolve functional harmony and Brahms comes in third because I think he perfected the tonal symphony (that is not to say that Brahms was not harmonically intriguing and did not break some conventions, just that when comparing his music to Mahler or Wagner, his is much more conservative.)

As for Dvorak, who is my favorite composer of all time, saying that the Ninth symphony is poor is incredibly ignorant. Each movement is a gem and his use of monothematicism is brilliant. Saying that the New World Symphony is his only known piece is also incredibly ignorant. His seventh and eighth symphonies are also wideply played (and in my opinion, better than the ninth) as is his Slavonic Dances. His cello concerto is standard repertoire (prompting Brahms to say "Had I known that one could write a cello concerto like this, I would have written one long ago!") In the chamber music world, his string quartets are widely performed.

Thank goodness someone agreed with me, I am also a fan of dvorak's 9 it is pure genious I loved the 1st and 2nd movements best!

Beethoven is hands down one of the greatest treasures of civilization. Ha ha, I love oxymorons.

I don't see an oxymoron there.

And to Sir Violinist:

I love movements 1&2, but I think my favorite is movement 4. It's just so powerful and awesome. It's one of the pieces that got me into music!

The oxymoron was Beethoven and treasures of civilization. It's an oxymoron because I wasn't trying to imply that Beethoven wasn't civilized.

I just want to say I'm glad for everyone who posted something here. I asked quite a crazy question, but sometimes a crazy question can get you the answer you're looking for.

Though in this way, I don't see why.

I don't see an oxymoron there.

And to Sir Violinist:

I love movements 1&2, but I think my favorite is movement 4. It's just so powerful and awesome. It's one of the pieces that got me into music!

I love 9, but 8 is just as good! And the 3rd movement of 6!!! AHH!! Fantastic!!!

The oxymoron was Beethoven and treasures of civilization. It's an oxymoron because I wasn't trying to imply that Beethoven wasn't civilized.

I prefer Shostakovich to Beethoven, but that doesn't mean he's better, necessarily.

Beethoven's works are often quite bad (theory-wise) in terms of modulation, is orchestration was poor, especially for Violin.

I see you're justifying your statement with your superior-to-Beethoven knowledge of composition.

Seriously, don't just make such an incredibly bizarre statement! Back it up! Provide examples!

*Puts head in hands*

I see you're justifying your statement with your superior-to-Beethoven knowledge of composition.

Seriously, don't just make such an incredibly bizarre statement! Back it up! Provide examples!

It is very well known that his orchestration wasn't great. His writing for violin shows that he composed it on the piano. This is not me saying this. This is every violinist I have ever talked to... Teachers, students.....

You haven't backed up again.

It isn't exactly a secret... Leonore was heavily criticized for it. Little or no preparation for a new key.

You've just provided statements again. Back that up, instead of making me assume it IS backed up.

Why does "little or no preparation for a new key" mean that was a result of poor skills?

Why do the supposed faults of one composition translate to "Beethoven's works are often quite bad"?

If you're going to make bizarre statements, back them up, or no-one will believe you.

The opinions of a few violin players you know doesn't make Beethoven's orchestral violin writing bad.