Chopin overrated?

[BoliverAllmon]

Do you think chopin is overrated as a composer? sure he writes wonderful melodies, but as a complete composer what do you think? I have been really looking through some of his music and have noticed that they are extremely repetitive. He also tends to cadence (at times) very quickly sometimes every 2-3 measures. His b min. waltz is just a piece compositional crap. The constant F# that he keeps coming back to is annoying.

again, what do you think?

[Daevren]

I agree. The only two reasons he is famous and highly rated on this forum is that he composed for piano and that he had the X factor.

He had great melodic creativity and imagination. But he was a clumsy and limited composer. I get the idea he lacked intelligence and/or motivation to become a great composer. Of course he also died early, but try and compare the development of his style with someone like Scriabin.

But on this forum it is really 'bad': https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,10102.0.html

Chopin gets more votes than Beethoven and Bach together. Also notice Rachmaninoffs votes. Pia... uuh people here are quite biased.

If Chopin composed for flute no one would know him.

[stormx]

CHOPIN was a GENIUS,
and genius are never overrated.

[abe]

I don't like these rules of composition that some people judge peices by. Who cares if the peice doesn't adhere to set standards created by others. A peice should be judged by its overall effect as MUSIC, not as a structured scaffolding of notes and pitches. Chopin, while not my favorite composer, wrote very beautiful and powerful peices, many of which are simple and even miniature peices compared to most of Beethoven's works, yet I think Chopin's works for piano measure up in many ways to those of Beethoven. Listen to the F-minor Ballade or the last two Sonatas and defy me.

Actually, you are free to do so, because it's all a matter of opinion. No one can prove one peice is better than another. That said, I agree the many people, pianists and non-pianists, are a little too closed-minded and obsessed with Chopin and ESPECIALLY Rachmaninoff. It gets annoying. Other composers are just as good or better, ie Brahms, Beethoven, Bach, and many many others. The Rach 2 is NOT the only good concerto out there, nor is it the best IMO.

One more thing, Chopin I think was very original, which is also a big plus. Although he really only mastered piano writing, he certainly created a new style and had a profound influence on other piano composers after (as did Beethoven and Liszt of course).

[Daevren]

Who cares if the peice doesn't adhere to set standards created by others.

People that listen music.

A peice should be judged by its overall effect as MUSIC, not as a structured scaffolding of notes and pitches.

Why do you think people care so much about these 'rules'? Because you instantly hear it. BoliverAllmon even gets annoyed by it.

Plus, if you rate someone as a composer, shoudn't you look at the persons skill as a composer, and not at his or her popularity? I sometimes really wonder if the popularity of some music actually has something to do with properties of the music itself.

[apion]

but as a complete composer what do you think?

As a "complete composer," he's overrated.  He couldn't orchestrate worth beans.

If Beethoven or Brahms spent all of their energies exclusively on solo piano, they would have been greater than Chopin ........

[dinosaurtales]

Ah yes, but he gave us so much beautiful piano music that the others didn't.

[stormx]

To criticise Chopin's piano Concertos has become a cliche nowadays.

In my opinion, both are really BEAUTIFUL, and much better than many others well known piano concertos.

[Glyptodont]

I believe we have here a situation where a not informed critic has taken it on himself to diminish Chopin.

Debussy owes vast debt to Chopin.  Chopin opened up music to personal expression in a way that can hardly be rivalled.

One great critic said, "Chopin opened the piano, and Chopin closed the piano."  By the latter, he meant that Chopin really did not have a protege or disciple.  But individuals like Debussy learned much from Chopin.

It would be nice if Bernhart or someone would pop into this one.  I mean, isn't to diminish Chopin somehow WRONG? 

It is so absurd on the face of it, I can't even really take the issue seriously.

But it is sort of like blaspheming the Pope or something.  Orthodox clerics, UNITE ! !

Best to all--

[Derek]

I honestly don't get why people talk about the greatness or lack of greatness of composers as though it's some sort of universal, objective thing that rational people agree on.

Some people are moved deeply by Chopin, others are not. This is a purely subjective matter.   Whether his music adheres to complex architectural and theoretical devices is completely immaterial, in my opinion. I'd like to see any of Chopin's detractors write a piece of music that approaches the quality of his music, since he's so INFERIOR and IMMATURE a composer, and all.

I love Beethoven, too, but it is a fact that Chopin wrote far more pieces that I consistently enjoy than Beethoven did. All of Beethoven's sonatas may have impeccable Classical form, but if many of them don't move me, who cares how they are constructed? Nearly ALL of Chopin's preludes, waltzes and Nocturnes (and other pieces) move me.

[Rach3]

What does it matter that Chopin wrote exclusively for piano? How the heck does that make him any less of a composer?

[steinwayguy]

Why in the hell is this a thread? This is absolutely ridiculous.

[maxy]

agreed...

but then, why are we bumping this thread?

[Rach3]

Chopin is underrated. His piano music deserves much more recognition than it gets from certain online groups.

Discuss.

[vera]

Criticism seems to be something subject to fashion. Hanslick took Tchaikovsky to task for his violin-concerto in no uncertain terms. Schumann was attacked for his orchestrations. Rachmaninov Symphonies were seen as longwinded, etc. etc.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.What in the end is the most important is not the form or whatever technical deficiency there may be, but if the music has something to say, and manages to give some people some spiritual satisfaction. The music you feel most close to, you may not see any deficiencies in, because any deficiencies are overpowered by what you get out of the music.
On the other hand, music you do not feel close to, you may be inclined to see all the weaknesses of, as you do not get carried away by it and so are inclined to just listen critically.
Chopin wrote absolutely wonderful piano music, and in MY opinion is one of the greatest composers for piano. It is unfortunate, that not everyone sees this, but then not everyone likes Tolkien: Lord of the rings either, a book, that stirred up much controversy  in the past about whether it was good or not. It probably is comparable to how Chopin's music is perceived, as it attracts similarly totally opposing comments as Chopin's music does, including the quality of its creation.
Chopin's very popularity does seem to irritate some people, and subsequently a need is felt, to criticise it. Why not just accept, that there is great music, that we may not understand?

[LVB op.57]

I don't find Chopin to be as grossly overrated as some of the other posters are saying, but I have to say, sometimes I feel he gets slightly more credit than he deserves. My main complaint is that sometimes his music just strikes me as superficial, but that's just me. My favorite stuff from him is probably his etudes, scherzi, and concerti, despite subpar orchestration. By no means am I calling Chopin a bad composer, in fact, I consider him a very good one. However, I just don't see him as deserving of being held in the same regards as Bach and Beethoven.

[BoliverAllmon]

I don't find Chopin to be as grossly overrated as some of the other posters are saying, but I have to say, sometimes I feel he gets slightly more credit than he deserves. My main complaint is that sometimes his music just strikes me as superficial, but that's just me. My favorite stuff from him is probably his etudes, scherzi, and concerti, despite subpar orchestration. By no means am I calling Chopin a bad composer, in fact, I consider him a very good one. However, I just don't see him as deserving of being held in the same regards as Bach and Beethoven.

I agree with you. I don't think Chopin is a worthless composer. I find some of his music very good. I feel that he is overrated. He is put on some high pedestal that is so far above the rest of the world that I think is ridiculous. Someone here asked why should we care about the compositional aspect or something along that line. Well, here is my answer. Because of taking theory and ear-training courses. I hear music in terms of composition. I hear the structure. i hear the cadences. I hear all the stuff I talked about earlier. that is why I mentioned them. I attempt to listen with an educated ear not just perfunctorly.

[Daevren]

Come on, he is overrated here.

He got like 33% of the votes, 26% now, and just as much as Beethoven and Bach together in this poll: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,10102.0.html


Maybe he is only slightly overrated in general but surely hugely overrated here. And obviously he wasn't a genius. Not all people that do something worthwile or make something very beautiful are genius. One of the requirements in an IQ over 140. I really doubt he had such an IQ. And I did read his biography. If someone qualifies as a genius then its Mozart.

Look at this: Rach 12% and Mozart 3% Ack! I don't really love either of them but this is crazy...


Also a fun site: https://members.shaw.ca/delajara/Cox300.html Sand is on it, Chopin isn't

[Antnee]

My god people. Think about it for a second. Not to bash anyone's opinions, but how can you call any composer overrated? Overrated how? Because he's popular? He gets too much attention? Aww... that's too bad... I hate it when music gets too much attention... boo hoo. People the reason why chopin is so popular is.......  There. That's the answer. Being that there is none. If I were to list a reason it would no doubt be argued which would be pointless. I hardly dislike any single composer. The thing that makes a composer stand out for me is a sense of uniqueness. A voice in the music that I can recognize. That repetitiveness can be good. It means individuality. The pieces can sound the same and yet they are different. So what? It's music. Can you concieve that piano repetoire without him? He was a very important brick in the pyramid of music. To to take it away would be harmful not only to the brick itself but to all of the bricks that lie on it. Overrrated? No. Just  popular.

 Maybe this should be considered a certain admirable quality. Can you remeber the first time you heard his famous nocturne or his revolutionary etude?  They have become so popular that it's not the pieces you dislike, nor the composer, its the excessive attention they recieve.Try to remember the first time you heard a chopin piece. The first time I heard the "ocean" etude (one of the first I heard by him) I felt it was one of the most extra ordinary things I had ever heard. Of course may will say. "but the "ocean" is so overplayed. How can you like that?" Blah. I don't care. Countless people have critized composers and they have all ended with the same result. Nothing happens and few care. If anything it draws more attention to the composer which apperently he didn't deserve in the first place. And then there's the music. Its still there no matter what you think of it and it won't change. Enjoy it if you want, but if you don't, then don't.  Chopin is simply there giving us his music. Of couse there are others composers peoplelike that may not be as popular. Who gives a *** though? I like what I like and I'll play what I want.  Apperently he did something right because the piano repetoire is still ripe with his music. What more do you need of a composer other than music? Good music? Not popular, overplayed music? Ok fine. Whatever...

-Tony-

[ahmedito]

Actually, the problem is completely the opposite, and I think you dont realize that.

I tend to find that the more educated a musician comes the more common it becomes to dismiss Chopin as stupid melodies and corny piano music. Analisis and musicology and composition teachers in universities for years have kept saying that Chopin was a mediocre composer at best and that he is NOWHERE near the level of Beethoven Mozart Debussy Bach Liszt etc etc.

I disagree, I think Chopin was a genius. And apart from the revolution that took place by the way he wrote for the piano, his harmonies were essential for the development of Liszt's and therefore Wagner's musical languaje. And criticizing his orchestration is cliche. When compared to many other concertos of his time, where the orchestra is "optional" at best, they are works of genius.

[steinwayguy]

Come on, he is overrated here.

He got like 33% of the votes, 26% now, and just as much as Beethoven and Bach together in this poll: https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,10102.0.html


Maybe he is only slightly overrated in general but surely hugely overrated here. And obviously he wasn't a genius. Not all people that do something worthwile or make something very beautiful are genius. One of the requirements in an IQ over 140. I really doubt he had such an IQ. And I did read his biography. If someone qualifies as a genius then its Mozart.

Look at this: Rach 12% and Mozart 3% Ack! I don't really love either of them but this is crazy...


Also a fun site: https://members.shaw.ca/delajara/Cox300.html Sand is on it, Chopin isn't

What? You're an idiot, that's what.

[Siberian Husky]

What? You're an idiot, that's what.

im going to attempt the impossible and side with a white man for this one...

...over rated?..compared to?..beethoven?..mozart?..good ol bach n rach n fach?

seriously.. two are trying to parrallel two different worlds

*morphs into a robot*

self believes this is like comparing apples to oranges...tampons to pads..starbucks to jamba juice...self doesnt see the viability in objectively evaluating two that are not of justifiable and universally agreeable  origins that attribute similarities to execute such judgements of comparison..aside from MUSIC BEING MUSIC...self believes we are bored assholes when we resort to the point where we bash on composers..

*morphs into steinwayguy*

what you *** idiot?..what you say?..your ignorant fool?..yes i know this...

*morphs into Bernhard*

Sir Daevren...i strongly and peacefully advise you to harness your capacity to reason, to better govern your emotions to induce judgement that is worthy of goodness, in its entirely and absolute, unchanging nature. Music is art in form of liquids as if molds to the perspective of one's mental cup, vase, pitcher, bucket, or toothpaste cup....let philosophy guide you my son...

*morphs into Bob*

OMG what you have just said in regards to Chopin's music has put my snails to death!!..how dare you! _@_...._@_....\@_...ah one still lives...carry on...

*morphs into tash*

i will paint a picture in oils and acrylics of Chopin punching you in the face for speaking such blasphemy in the name of Chopin and his greatness

*morphs into Rob47*

you know i agree with Daevren...Chopin couldnt even top 2pac and his thuggish appeal...EAST SIDE!!!!

*morphs into Janice*

you know..this discussion would be great for an AIM chat room..or better yet!..we should meet up on 6PM Pacific Standard time this friday and discuss this issue here on the PF Chat room..see you guys then 

*morphs into mikeyg*

KAHH MEEEHH!!..HAAA MEEEEEE...HAAAAA!!!!!

*morphs into Jenni R*

hAhahHAahaha im sooso dryunk rightt noiww..Choopin isnt oveerrated..hiisss sooo OVErrPLAYTED..geet it?1?..it rhymesss hahahagga!!!1111one

*morphs into BreadBoy*

i LOVE chopins music what are you talking about?...i have no hands..no feet..no limbs at all actually..i have no idea what a piano is..and i have narcolepsy..but i started learning his fantasie impromptu...its such an awesome piece i think i can get it in a few days looks pretty easy

*morphs into Nils Johan*

behave people


*morphs back into siberian husky*

for those of you i left out..sorry..but its 2:30 AM and i need sleep for work tomorrow..peace out humans

[LVB op.57]

My god people. Think about it for a second. Not to bash anyone's opinions, but how can you call any composer overrated? Overrated how? Because he's popular? He gets too much attention? Aww... that's too bad... I hate it when music gets too much attention... boo hoo. People the reason why chopin is so popular is.......  There. That's the answer. Being that there is none. If I were to list a reason it would no doubt be argued which would be pointless. I hardly dislike any single composer. The thing that makes a composer stand out for me is a sense of uniqueness. A voice in the music that I can recognize. That repetitiveness can be good. It means individuality. The pieces can sound the same and yet they are different. So what? It's music. Can you concieve that piano repetoire without him? He was a very important brick in the pyramid of music. To to take it away would be harmful not only to the brick itself but to all of the bricks that lie on it. Overrrated? No. Just  popular.

 Maybe this should be considered a certain admirable quality. Can you remeber the first time you heard his famous nocturne or his revolutionary etude?  They have become so popular that it's not the pieces you dislike, nor the composer, its the excessive attention they recieve.Try to remember the first time you heard a chopin piece. The first time I heard the "ocean" etude (one of the first I heard by him) I felt it was one of the most extra ordinary things I had ever heard. Of course may will say. "but the "ocean" is so overplayed. How can you like that?" Blah. I don't care. Countless people have critized composers and they have all ended with the same result. Nothing happens and few care. If anything it draws more attention to the composer which apperently he didn't deserve in the first place. And then there's the music. Its still there no matter what you think of it and it won't change. Enjoy it if you want, but if you don't, then don't.  Chopin is simply there giving us his music. Of couse there are others composers peoplelike that may not be as popular. Who gives a *** though? I like what I like and I'll play what I want.  Apperently he did something right because the piano repetoire is still ripe with his music. What more do you need of a composer other than music? Good music? Not popular, overplayed music? Ok fine. Whatever...

-Tony-

I agree with some of what you say, and I do think he's a very good composer whose etudes are a cornerstone of the repertoire. What I don't think is that he's ever done anything so great that I'd put him in the same class as Beethoven or Bach. I'm not dismissing Chopin as "stupid melodies", which some "high level" pianists do. All I'm saying is that there are some composers who Chopin can't compare to.

[Daevren]

Antnee, aah, saying Chopin is overrated makes me an anti-music person? Huh?

I am not saying music should get less attention. I am not saying that people that like Chopin and listen to him all day should stop listening to music.

I am saying people should increase their attention to music to other composers. Or maybe shift it.

Chopin being twice as good as Bach and Beethoven is crazy. Why don't we just admit our piano bias. Where do we talk about Spohr? Paganini? Vieuxtemps? Wieniawski?

The fact that I do like Chopin doesn't even matter.

I tend to find that the more educated a musician comes the more common it becomes to dismiss Chopin as stupid melodies and corny piano music.

Yes kind of, but 'stupid' should be in quotes. The melodies are very good. But there is nothing amazing about his music. Its enjoyable but nothing special. Unless you are a uneducated pianist it seems. I wonder why.

Like I said, Chopin has the X factor.

[Antnee]

Of course we all wish other composers would recieve equal attention. That is the goal of us pianists. But of course this isn' t the case. Some just recieve more attention than others. I wish many other composers would be just as popular. This still doesn't mean that the other composers are underrated or inferior, nor does it mean that Chopin is overrated or inferior. He simply wrote his music.

Antnee, aah, saying Chopin is overrated makes me an anti-music person? Huh?

No, it just makes you sound like you don' tknow what you are talking about.

I don't understand your logic people. On what universal scale are you able to place these people and their music on in order to somehow compare and rate them. Chopin wasn't amazing how? He had such a unique voice and his music is very personal . What more do you need?  I can't stand people that rate composers based on rules and how they broke them or altered them or whatever. Just listen to the music. Do you like it? If you don't well then too bad. Maybe this is a flaw in the composers music. Poor Schumann for instance. I absolutely adore his music. He is one of my favorites. But his music didn't attract as much attention. Why? I don't know, but that doen't detract from his genius. Nor does the popularity of chopin's detract from his. These arguments have gone on for ages. Just look at the forums. There was an entire thread about how liszt sucks ass. What the hell? And then there was another about how boring Mozart is. Composer bashing is a worthless time waster. Where do we end up with it? only people with no opinions of thier own would be affected by such discussions and I would hope no one takes such threads too seriously. On that note ... I'm done..

-Tony-

[Daevren]

It doesn't even matter if I like the music or not. Just compare their works. It should be easy to see that Chopin is overrated if he gets more voted than Beethoven and Bach together.

[wufnu]

Chopin is something strange to me.  I can't say he's better or worse than someone else, or over rate or under rated.  Here's what I can say about Chopin...


I've been listening to "classical" music pretty hardcore for the past 15 years or so now, which is to say enough to impress knuckle draggers and little enough that I look like a fool to a professional composer or audiophile.  For all this time, Chopin's music bored me.  I thought it was uninteresting, uneventful, drab, and downright crappy.  I couldn't understand why people listened to him at all, why did I even know his name?  He certainly was no Bach.

Somewhere, something changed.  One night, I enjoyed listening to nocturne in Ebm.  Out of the blue, it was very moving.  I searched other things out, heard Ballad No.1 in Gm.  Marche Funebre.  Waltz No.3 in Abm.  Prelude in Em.  The list goes on.  One day I was uninterested, the next I was moved more than I have ever been moved by music before.  Go figure.

So, what I can say with 100% certainty is that he is most definitely not over rated and I can say that his music affects me on a much deeper level than Bach or Beethoven could ever get close to.  Out of the many composers music I have listened to for many thousands of hours, none have touched me as much as Chopin.  Mozart's Requiem comes close, but not enough. 

I would say it's like the blues.  Some people get it, some don't.  Hey, if arpeggios and notes per second shredding is your idea of skill, have at it.  I still dig the blues more.  <3

[JCarey]

Chopin is probably the most overrated composer there is. Yet, have you seen the hostility in the topic "Does anybody not like Chopin?"? It is stunning how people can feel so strongly about something that is based on opinion, where there is really no right and wrong.

Truthfully, it makes me sick.

[pita bread]

Some of you make it sound like high treason to dislike Chopin- who are you to tell someone that his own personal preference "makes him sound like he doesn't know what he is talking about"?

[ted]

I am not qualified to answer the question in the general sense. Speaking for myself, I continue to learn from him, as I do from many other masters. Chopin's music is not the be all and end all for me but it does constitute a region of my musical landscape which I visit often and where I always feel at home.

[Barbosa-piano]

 Chopin's music deserves recognition, as much as other great composers' music... All the opinions should be respected. I do not believe he is overrated, but he might be largely underrated by some people, which is strange to my way of thinking.

Sincerely,
Mario Barbosa.

[jas]

The melodies are very good. But there is nothing amazing about his music. Its enjoyable but nothing special. Unless you are a uneducated pianist it seems. I wonder why.

Well, that's completely untrue. A huge number of scholars have spent years on Chopin's works. I'm not uneducated. I -- and any number of other people here -- can recognise that as far as traditional musical structure is concerned, Chopin's music doesn't cut it. But the point is that that doesn't matter because to many, that's not what's important. We don't all listen to music in order to be able to hear its individual components and their relationships to each other. Some listen to it as a whole. Is that wrong?

And what is "traditional" or a "proper" structure in music, anyway? If you take Beethoven's death as the end of form-obsessed Classicism (and I know I'm generalising but there was a significant change there, most agree), then there's been over 150 years since that time in which enormous changes have occured in the field of music. It has progressed (and, some might say, regressed) rapidly. Very rapidly. And yet, for some reason, some people still look back to the 18th/early 19th centuries for a model of what music is supposed to sound like.

Personally, I have never seen any "point" to music. I don't care if a composer has no idea what sonata form is. It takes a certain kind of musical mind -- genius? I don't know -- to have the ability to consistently write music that people love, that says something to people. And that's an ability not many people have and one that I don't think should be belittled.

As for Chopin in particular, for those who think he's overrated, would it be better if you could persuade a few million people to do the "correct" thing and vote for Bach, Beethoven or Mozart in online polls? Just to move Chopin the upstart down a few places to where he should be? And for those who were horrified to see Mozart and Rachmaninoff or whoever lower than you expected, would you have voted for them? Or do you just expect other people to? It appears that a lot of people think the same way -- they vote for who they like best, not who tradition tells them they should, but are then shocked when someone like Chopin comes out top because ... well, that's not the way it's supposed to be, is it?

I think it's very interesting. Even if he were universally adored, to the annoyance of many, that wouldn't make his music of lesser value. The fact that his music isn't obscure or esoteric, or isn't a defining example of what a fugue should be doesn't mean that it's less worthy than something that is. It's just different. My point being, so what if he's well-loved (I don't agree with the term overrated because that suggests that it's okay for people to like him as long as there aren't too many of them), even moreso than the most celebrated composers? Are you going to let that taint your own (possible) enjoyment of his music?

Jas

[Daevren]

Structure and order is music. The way Chopin's music is structured and ordered compared to people like Beethoven or Liszt is not very impressive. This is the point. To me some peices of Chopin sound like they need to be 'fixed', even when they really sound great.

Chopin surely understanded music, but he didn't understand composition.

Jas, I don't understand your point. How do the things you say disprove the things I said?

One thing everyone realises very fast when they get interested in any artform is that popularity has nothing to do with quality.

[Nightscape]

Daevrun, if you're so concerned about Chopin being admired by too many people, and you say that popularity has nothing to do with quality, then why are you even concerned at all?  Shouldn't it be enough that you find Bach and Beethoven wrote better music (so you believe) and that that belief is enough to be satisfied with?  I greatly admire and adore the music of Bela Bartok, for example.  His music is some of the best "composed" music ever written - meticulous and imaginative detail in all of the compositional techniques.  Yet how can I seriously expect a majority to appreciate his music?  Likewise, it seems perfectly normal that more people prefer Chopin, as his music has a certain clarity and directness that many people prefer.  Of course, if we want to talk about clarity and directness, we should mention that about 99% of people prefer popular music!

Anyways, all I'm saying is that Bach will never be as loved as Chopin... simply because intellectuals prefer Bach, and emotionals prefer Chopin, and there are more emotionals than intellectuals.  Let's not forget that these two groups of people judge by thier own arbitrary standards as well.  By the emotional's standards, much of Bach and Beethoven is not that great.  But Chopin is wonderful - his music is so "right".  The opposite is true for the compositional intellectual or purist.  But what an ego to say that this is the totally true, accurate, and objective way to enjoy music!

[jas]

Jas, I don't understand your point. How do the things you say disprove the things I said?

Only the first bit was aimed at you. I don't agree that only "uneducated" people think Chopin's music has worth, that's all. The rest is my opinion on the topic in general.

Chopin surely understanded music, but he didn't understand composition.

But people have been composing music for a lot longer than sonata form and fugue and IV-V-I progressions have been around. It's only in the past 400 years or so that people have developed this weird idea that music is only worthy if it's crammed into one of a few moulds. And only in the West. What about people in other cultures who make music that has nothing to do with the Western Classical idea of what music should be? Does what they do not count as composing -- even if it is notated and disseminated -- just because they don't know how to write a sonata?

Besides which, it's not that Chopin couldn't compose in this way; he just chose not to. He got through the conservatory in Warsaw with flying colours so it's pretty safe to assume he was at the very least capable of composing in more traditional forms. But it wasn't for him. It didn't channel what he wanted to say so he did it his own way and produced beautiful, original music that has more than stood the test of time. How can that be sub-standard composing?

On the contrary, I think it proves the opposite. And I agree that popularity has nothing to do with quality. So why does Chopin's popularity make him overrated?

Jas

[Daevren]

I don't agree that only "uneducated" people think Chopin's music has worth, that's all.

Now you are putting words into my mouth. First, I made a generalisation. I din't say 'only'. Plus I never said Chopin's music has no value. Really, people should try and grasp the subtilities expressed in other peoples post. If I say I find Chopin overrated when I look at his scores and his popularity I don't say all his music should be burned and destoyed forever.

A friend of mine doesn't understand Tolkien's popularity and he studies literature. I also read the book (LotR) and I understand his critique but I don't really see why he makes such a big fuss about it. Until I look at the way I look at music. He doesn't say: "Burn all Tolkien books." He just compares Tolkien's skill and popularity to that of other writers and what he sees doesn't make sense to him. I do the same.

I will proudly learn and play some Chopin pieces. But much more Beethoven and Bach.

t's only in the past 400 years or so that people have developed this weird idea that music is only worthy if it's crammed into one of a few moulds. And only in the West.

Yes, form and structure with the purpose of crowning harmony king. That is the point of classical music. This is what it excells at. It sacrifices melody and rhythm. Sure, this is not the only way music has to be. But if we are to rate Chopins compositions then form and stucture are the first thing we look at.


I am not saying he should compose in old strutures. Many composers after Chopin showed more skill in this fine art. Chopin didn't invent new ways to write music. And about the nature of the structure and form in his music, I am not sure if this was his purpose or not, and neither do you.

I listen to Indian music, carnatic, hindustanie, qawwali etc. Those people are will often make very poor composers. But they have the best improvisers imaginable and the best melodies and rhythms thinkable. Their music is of a different nature.

So why does Chopin's popularity make him overrated?

Huh? You suggest we should call popular composers and music underrated? If he wasn't popular he couldn't have been overrated. I just think his popularity isn't justified by the skill shown in his compositions compared to other composers, for example Beethoven or Bach.

[LVB op.57]

Is it possible that more than Chopin being overrated, Beethoven, Mozart, and Bach are underrated?

[Antnee]

Some of you make it sound like high treason to dislike Chopin- who are you to tell someone that his own personal preference "makes him sound like he doesn't know what he is talking about"?

Now, now...

I only said that his idea of chopin being overrated made it sound like that. I specifically said I wasn't out to bash anyone's opinions.  How can a composer be overrated? And I agree With J carey. Its all about preference. So how can you call a composer overrated simply because he "cannot compare to those like beethoven and bach" Who can compare for that matter? These discussions make me sick as well. It would have been more appropriate topic if it was more along the lines of "I dislike chopin, how about you?" BUt Overrated? Please. Is that to say the rest of us are incompetent somehow for enjoying him? I don't think so...

Well, that's completely untrue. A huge number of scholars have spent years on Chopin's works. I'm not uneducated. I -- and any number of other people here -- can recognise that as far as traditional musical structure is concerned, Chopin's music doesn't cut it. But the point is that that doesn't matter because to many, that's not what's important. We don't all listen to music in order to be able to hear its individual components and their relationships to each other. Some listen to it as a whole. Is that wrong?

And what is "traditional" or a "proper" structure in music, anyway? If you take Beethoven's death as the end of form-obsessed Classicism (and I know I'm generalising but there was a significant change there, most agree), then there's been over 150 years since that time in which enormous changes have occured in the field of music. It has progressed (and, some might say, regressed) rapidly. Very rapidly. And yet, for some reason, some people still look back to the 18th/early 19th centuries for a model of what music is supposed to sound like.

Personally, I have never seen any "point" to music. I don't care if a composer has no idea what sonata form is. It takes a certain kind of musical mind -- genius? I don't know -- to have the ability to consistently write music that people love, that says something to people. And that's an ability not many people have and one that I don't think should be belittled.

As for Chopin in particular, for those who think he's overrated, would it be better if you could persuade a few million people to do the "correct" thing and vote for Bach, Beethoven or Mozart in online polls? Just to move Chopin the upstart down a few places to where he should be? And for those who were horrified to see Mozart and Rachmaninoff or whoever lower than you expected, would you have voted for them? Or do you just expect other people to? It appears that a lot of people think the same way -- they vote for who they like best, not who tradition tells them they should, but are then shocked when someone like Chopin comes out top because ... well, that's not the way it's supposed to be, is it?

I think it's very interesting. Even if he were universally adored, to the annoyance of many, that wouldn't make his music of lesser value. The fact that his music isn't obscure or esoteric, or isn't a defining example of what a fugue should be doesn't mean that it's less worthy than something that is. It's just different. My point being, so what if he's well-loved (I don't agree with the term overrated because that suggests that it's okay for people to like him as long as there aren't too many of them), even moreso than the most celebrated composers? Are you going to let that taint your own (possible) enjoyment of his music?

Jas

Exactly I agree completely...

This really is a silly argument. You cannot "rate" composers and their works. There is no scale to follow that applies to all music in the world. Music is music and it cannot be judged. You either like it or you don't. Now i think we should respect each other's opinions on the matter and quickly end the discussion as, like i said before, it is getting us nowhere fast...

-Tony-

[Rach3]

I agree with everything Tony said.

[pita bread]

The only way to rate composers and pieces, I suppose, is personal preference, and that differs from one person to the next, entirely subjective.

It's nice though, that this thread has remained civilized unlike the one in the repertoire subforum.

[dlu]

im going to attempt the impossible and side with a white man for this one...

...over rated?..compared to?..beethoven?..mozart?..good ol bach n rach n fach?

seriously.. two are trying to parrallel two different worlds

*morphs into a robot*

self believes this is like comparing apples to oranges...tampons to pads..starbucks to jamba juice...self doesnt see the viability in objectively evaluating two that are not of justifiable and universally agreeable  origins that attribute similarities to execute such judgements of comparison..aside from MUSIC BEING MUSIC...self believes we are bored assholes when we resort to the point where we bash on composers..

*morphs into steinwayguy*

what you *** idiot?..what you say?..your ignorant fool?..yes i know this...

*morphs into Bernhard*

Sir Daevren...i strongly and peacefully advise you to harness your capacity to reason, to better govern your emotions to induce judgement that is worthy of goodness, in its entirely and absolute, unchanging nature. Music is art in form of liquids as if molds to the perspective of one's mental cup, vase, pitcher, bucket, or toothpaste cup....let philosophy guide you my son...

*morphs into Bob*

OMG what you have just said in regards to Chopin's music has put my snails to death!!..how dare you! _@_...._@_....\@_...ah one still lives...carry on...

*morphs into tash*

i will paint a picture in oils and acrylics of Chopin punching you in the face for speaking such blasphemy in the name of Chopin and his greatness

*morphs into Rob47*

you know i agree with Daevren...Chopin couldnt even top 2pac and his thuggish appeal...EAST SIDE!!!!

*morphs into Janice*

you know..this discussion would be great for an AIM chat room..or better yet!..we should meet up on 6PM Pacific Standard time this friday and discuss this issue here on the PF Chat room..see you guys then 

*morphs into mikeyg*

KAHH MEEEHH!!..HAAA MEEEEEE...HAAAAA!!!!!

*morphs into Jenni R*

hAhahHAahaha im sooso dryunk rightt noiww..Choopin isnt oveerrated..hiisss sooo OVErrPLAYTED..geet it?1?..it rhymesss hahahagga!!!1111one

*morphs into BreadBoy*

i LOVE chopins music what are you talking about?...i have no hands..no feet..no limbs at all actually..i have no idea what a piano is..and i have narcolepsy..but i started learning his fantasie impromptu...its such an awesome piece i think i can get it in a few days looks pretty easy

*morphs into Nils Johan*

behave people


*morphs back into siberian husky*

for those of you i left out..sorry..but its 2:30 AM and i need sleep for work tomorrow..peace out humans

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[pita bread]

Hahaha comedic genius!

[Sergey R]

I loved that post. It completely typifies each person!

[mikeyg]

I loved that post. It completely typifies each person!

:p



KAMEHAMEHA

[jas]

Huh? You suggest we should call popular composers and music underrated? If he wasn't popular he couldn't have been overrated.

I didn't say popular composers should be seen as underrated; now you're putting words into my mouth. That would be ridiculous. What I said was that just because a composer is popular, that doesn't necessarily make him overrated, because who can decide what it is in a piece of music that makes it worth liking?
 

I just think his popularity isn't justified by the skill shown in his compositions compared to other composers, for example Beethoven or Bach.

But just because from the point of view of someone with a knowledge of music, Chopin's music isn't deserving of the popularity it receives -- and there are plenty of people with equal knowledge of music who wouldn't agree, anyway -- doesn't mean that that applies to everyone. There are countless nonmusicians out there who listen to music for just what it is, who don't know or care anything about composition. They don't place the same value on this as you do. On the other hand, they place more value on things that don't matter so much to you. People listen to music -- and prefer some kinds of music to others -- for innumerable different reasons. Who's to say what is and what isn't a valid reason for liking a particular piece of music?
Chopin's popularity is a reflection of that. He appeals to people in ways that many other composers -- even those generally agreed to be the "best" -- don't. And he appeals less to others -- like you -- for equally valid reasons.
That's why I don't think he's overrated. Overrated in what way? In the way it draws people in, fascinates them, whatever, you couldn't claim that he was overrated. In innovative use of the piano you couldn't call him overrated. It depends what you're looking for, and not everyone looks for the same thing.
That's what I meant. Well, more or less.

Jas

[musik_man]

The only way to rate composers and pieces, I suppose, is personal preference, and that differs from one person to the next, entirely subjective.

It's nice though, that this thread has remained civilized unlike the one in the repertoire subforum.

I've been thinking about objectivity versus subjectivity in music alot recently.  I've come to the conclusion that neither is entirely sufficient.  There's little doubt in my mind that everyone in this forum would agree that Beethoven's op111 is better than Leonard Nimoy's Ballad of Bilbo Baggins.(although if anyone wants to argue that, it'd be good for at least a few laughs)  I really can't accept that op111 trouncing Nimoy is entirely subjective.  Even if one can't sit down and "prove" that one is better, I really think that op111 is better in a way that transcends my tastes.

Of course the question that follows my theory is 'How can one judge the quality of music?"  I think the best judge is time.  Beethoven's op111 will be considered a masterpiece forever.  Nimoy's song is a joke to everyone after 30 years.(and a hilarious one too )

And the next question then must be, if time is the best judge, what do we do for pieces written recently.  In all honesty, we can discuss them, but I don't think we can draw much conclusions.  After all, it took Mahler 60 years after his death to get his rightful recognition.

I'd like to end by saying that this 'objectivity' that I think exists, is a horribly inaccurate.  It can tell us that Beethoven was better than Kalkbrenner, but it's not accurate enough to discriminate among any really talented composers.  So in the case of Chopin, I'm siding with the people who thinks his position is something subjective.

For those who haven't heard the Nimoy, go here https://www.tolkiencollector.com/bilbo5.mov

[thalberg]

Is Chopin overrated?

Of course not.  Who is doing this overrating you speak of?  To say he's better than Bach or Beethoven would be overrating him, but no one ever says that about Chopin.  No one says he's the greatest composer who ever  lived.  So where is your question coming from?

People do say that he is great in a general sense, and whether you happen to like him or not, there's simply no room for disagreement there.  His harmonies were extremely novel and innovative, imaginative and colorful.  I've analyzed in depth most of the preludes and all of the Ballades so what I'm saying is very well-informed.

In terms of his idiomatic writing, he pretty much invented modern piano playing out of the blue.  His etudes in particular made demands on the pianist no one else would have dreamt of at the time.

Perhaps you think he's overrated in yet another sense--that people play him too much.  All I can say to that is  that if a composer genuinely appeals to lots of performers and lots of audiences for many years, you can't suppress that or criticize it--it's really the most genuine sign of quality in music.  Low quality, trendy music just doesn't attract people from every country and walk of life for hundreds of years.



 

[thalberg]

Please disregard the above response.  I posted it without reading the rest of the thread, and it's all been said and addressed already.  Sorry.

[BoliverAllmon]

no problem

[catchketchup]

Is Chopin overrated?

Of course not.  Who is doing this overrating you speak of?  To say he's better than Bach or Beethoven would be overrating him, but no one ever says that about Chopin.  No one says he's the greatest composer who ever  lived.  So where is your question coming from?

People do say that he is great in a general sense, and whether you happen to like him or not, there's simply no room for disagreement there.  His harmonies were extremely novel and innovative, imaginative and colorful.  I've analyzed in depth most of the preludes and all of the Ballades so what I'm saying is very well-informed.

In terms of his idiomatic writing, he pretty much invented modern piano playing out of the blue.  His etudes in particular made demands on the pianist no one else would have dreamt of at the time.

Perhaps you think he's overrated in yet another sense--that people play him too much.  All I can say to that is  that if a composer genuinely appeals to lots of performers and lots of audiences for many years, you can't suppress that or criticize it--it's really the most genuine sign of quality in music.  Low quality, trendy music just doesn't attract people from every country and walk of life for hundreds of years.



 

In my opinion, one of the reasons why some people think Chopin is overrated is because people like you say "Chopin invented modern piano playing out of the blue", when the statement itself is not entirely true. Hummel's style of piano writing tremendously influenced Chopin, and Chopin was deeply inspired by his piano concertos, and wrote his own concertos in his style. It was Hummel who first started writing "sets of 24 preludes". And, during Chopin's time, there were other composers who explored different piano-writing styles - composers who developed "symphonic piano writing" - Schumann's Symphonic Etudes, (how underrated, obscured are they, compared to Chopin Etudes?) In terms of the concepts of modern piano technique, Liszt went farther than Chopin - martellato, alternation of hands, tremolos appear more frequently in Liszt's compositions.
What I'm saying is, Chopin was INDEED a great composer, he invented the form of Ballade, and made other great achievements - but like other great masters of the period, he received a lot of influence from his predecessors who also accomplished much in the genre of "modern piano music", and it wasn't only Chopin who worked from where his predecessors left off, there were Liszt, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Schubert - you name it.
Therefore, saying "Chopin invented modern piano writing OUT OF THE BLUE" might give some people the impression that he gets titles he doesn't really deserve. (ie. creator of modern piano writing) People who give him titles like that, intentionally ignore the achievements of other composers I listed above.
Too many people say "Beethoven gave rise to Romanticism" - this is not entirely true, also. While Beethoven probably did the major work in doing so, he obviously couldn't have done it alone, without the accomplishments of his predecessors (ie. Haydn, Mozart, Bach, Handel etc) and comtemporaries (ie. Paganini (who worked hard in developing modern violin technique), Hummel, Ries, Cramer etc)
Take Mozart for example, the method of starting a piece without melody lines, but with harmonic accompaniment (which became a favourite of the Romantics) was already being utilized by Mozart in his Piano Concerto No.27, Symphony No.40. And, his last symphony - No.41 sound strangely Romantic. (the 2nd movement definitely does) Piano Concertos No.20 in D minor, No.24 in C minor foreshadowed Schumann and Hummel.
Saying, "this composer accomplished that alone" is often risky and might give other people the impression that he's overrated. Don't get me wrong, I'm an avid admirer of Chopin.

-catchketchup