Who is the Greatest (Not Favourite) Composer

Hey, where is Schoenberg, Webern, Debussy and Varese?

Hey, where is Schoenberg, Webern, Debussy and Varese?

And Mingus, Monk, Coleman, Coltrane, Shorter?!

:whistling:

And Isto?!

Bach never slid into obscurity; his popularity has always been more or less the same, which is to say that those who know, know. . . . but Bach's "popularity" has spiked over the last hundred years particularly.

I think I agree; my wording was fairly ambiguous. Bach was known (even to Mozart and Beethoven) through only a handful of works, most of which were considered academic rather than musical. The tales about Mozart obsessing over DWK are almost certainly apocryphal - his study of baroque counterpoint was short, consuming and intense, but owed a great deal more to Fux than to Bach. It was really only Bach's keyboard works that were regularly performed after his death, and his sons' fame and influence far exceeded his own - right until the 19th-century. If any Bach was Mozart's hero, it was J.C. Bach; of this there is a wealth of surviving evidence.

Anyway. All this totally irrelevant, but it's interesting.

Hey, where is Schoenberg, Webern, Debussy and Varese?

No modernist/avant garde composers?:( I would have voted for Varese or Debussy. Oh well, I guess this is limited to those common practice composers.

Why is there no Debussy or Ravel? What do you have against the Impressionist period? I don't understand how you can have a serious list of possible greatest composers and include people like Haydn and Mendelssohn yet not include even one person from the Impressionist era.

Also, I find this whole subject rather silly. How can there be a greatest composer without any kind of personal bias? Maybe I'm simplifying things a bit but I generally associate "good" with stuff I like. No one purposely likes anything that they think is awful...at least, I hope not. So wouldn't someone's favorite composer also be the one they think is greatest? But let's say someone can get past their personal bias, what exactly defines "greatness"? Is it popularity? Is it how many composers after that they influenced? Is it their musical innovations? I really don't understand any of this.

You don't have to understand this, because it's just a silly poll on an internet forum.

No need to take it so seriously.

Vote whomever you like out of those and just write down his name and add several exclamation marks just like everyone else here :)

I voted for Haydn just to be non-coformist. :P

I think you got mixed up with J Lee's rhetoric there.

"there was literally nothing he ever attempted - nothing - that he was not the undisputed master of."

The nothing is just repeated for emphasis. The sentence without that reads:

"there was literally nothing he ever attempted that he was not the undisputed master of."

(p.s. exactly :) )

As great as Mozart was, Bach will always be the king of Harmony/Counterpoint.

I never understand Beethoven, I cant stand the symphonies I've heard by him. Can someone give me a suggestion of where I should start.

I never understand Beethoven, I cant stand the symphonies I've heard by him. Can someone give me a suggestion of where I should start.

His 3rd? 5th? 7th 8th 9th?

You know you must've not listened to a lot of beeth if you don't like his music...try his piano concerto..or Violin concerto..his string quartets are amazing as well..see if you can find some around :)

I can see how someone might not care for Beethoven, or might fail to understand him. His music, particularly the later stuff, can be rather thick and opaque. Even early on he tended to be noisy and obstreperous at times. Those qualities are part of what makes his music great, but it isn't exactly "easy listening."

However, I do want to change my mind about my vote in the early days of this thread for Mozart as the greatest composer, particularly since part of my rationale was a hypothetical argument of what he might have become had he lived longer. Using that logic, what might Beethoven have become had he not had deafness to deal with as an obstacle - a considerable impediment to a musician? Or was it his deafness and musical isolation that made him as great as he was? Interesting points to ponder, but pointless as arguments, since we cannot possibly know.

My vote changes to Beethoven for reasons others have already cited capably, as well as a renewed appreciation based on a year of studying his keyboard works on the fortepiano, which precipitated further study and appreciation of his output in other areas. I tend to prefer his earlier works, but his singular importance in the history of music is undeniable to me now. Not only was he arguably the culmination of the Classical era, but he ushered in a new era, in effect, on his own.

It's unfortunate that the list is so small. There are so many incredible composers, but out of those, I've chosen Brahms.

Bach is, bar none, the greatest composer of all time. He single-handedly brought an end to the Baroque era by rendering all the forms totally obsolete himself... it's both scary and depressing, really.

First, we need to define the word: Greatest. What does that word actually means? Can you simply use that word between two composers to make proper meanful comparation? I think not.

I think of "greatest" in terms of achievement, honestly. Beethoven comes very close indeed to Bach's greatness, as Beethoven also turned the musical world on its head. But Bach did it a different way which, to me, is greater. I suppose that it's that Beethoven did it by force, whereas Bach just mastered everything...

Once you get to a certain level there's no real way to say who's the greatest. Obviously Beethoven is 'greater' than the sound of somebody farting.

Out of the list, I'd probably go with Tschaikovsky, but if Mozart had been alive at the time of Tschaikovsky, there's no knowing what he could have achieved.

you don't expand the choices enough

Bach is, bar none, the greatest composer of all time. He single-handedly brought an end to the Baroque era by rendering all the forms totally obsolete himself... it's both scary and depressing, really.

If Binary form, fugue and Ritornello form are obselete then I'm a polar bear.

Bach ... single-handedly brought an end to the Baroque era by rendering all the forms totally obsolete himself... it's both scary and depressing, really.

That's funny, but I think it overemphasises Bach's contemporary influence. He was an offshoot of a dying breed, a musical dead-end from which would later spring renewed interest in counterpoint when his works were reappraised. Telemann was much more highly rated at the time.

I voted for Bach, but not because of his place in musical history - simply because his music delights me on so many levels. If 'great' must be distinct from favourite, and some objective judgement is expected, then I'm afraid I can't answer. Without defining 'greatest' I can do no better than rely on gut instinct.

Bach is, bar none, the greatest composer of all time. He single-handedly brought an end to the Baroque era by rendering all the forms totally obsolete himself... it's both scary and depressing, really.

for this statement to bear ANY truth at all, no composer after Bach could have used any of the forms he used... which is obviously not true, since thousands upon thousands of sonatas, rondos, fugues, arias, gigues, masses, etc... were written after Bach's passing.

Where's Cage?

In all seriousness it all seems a bit romanticy with Bach thrown in at the end...

Where's Cage?

In all seriousness it all seems a bit romanticy with Bach thrown in at the end...

Well..since it was created almost three years ago, complaining about the poll is a bit silly, eh?

Also, OBVIOUSLY they can't include every major composer from every major genre. ;)

Well..since it was created almost three years ago, complaining about the poll is a bit silly, eh?

Also, OBVIOUSLY they can't include every major composer from every major genre. ;)

He could've atleast included Ellington. :P

Now, in a massive burst of procrastination, I read the entire thread, because I do think it's very interesting what people think, and in a way I agree that there shouldn't be much discussion beyond Bach / Mozart / Beethoven, mainly in terms of influence. However I would seriously add two composers to this list, both of whom I believe, allowing for their influences either to mature just as those of B/M/B, or become as well known, should be considered the 'greatest' composers.

1. Monteverdi - I do find it quite astonishing nobody has mentioned him before. There's no point talking about how many operas or large-scale religious works 'great' composers have written: Monteverdi practically invented dramatic music (madrigals and his 19 operas), unprepared dissonance, large-scale choral works (Vespers of 1610), instrumental writing itself as distinct from vocal writing; was probably the most innovative and divergent composer from the prevalent style of his time out of B/M/B; was the first composer ever to specify particular instruments for parts, and particular playing techniques (tremolo and pizzicato for strings in his 8th book of madrigals); and basically single-handedly laid the way for the Baroque. When you consider where he came from, where he ended up, what musical concepts were literally non-existent before him, and also (of course) his immense talent in writing exciting, beautiful, colourful music, I think he absolutely gets my vote.

2. Debussy - but this is an area I'm less knowledgable about. And I have to take the dog for a walk. :P So I'll talk about him another day. (I considered Faur