the most over played and overrated composer is...

[pita bread]

Specifics plz.

Here's your answer.

Most of liszt's compositions are simple. Hungarian rhapsody's, etudes, concerto's, the transcriptions, schubert songs....compared with most of Brahms. Have you ever done an analysis class on Brahms? You'll soon find that he was very clever and incredibly complex.

[pita bread]

hey, i didnt say brahms was more simple than liszt. all i said was that the simplicity of 118 -119 is the beauty of it, because they are perfectly written pieces when next to one another.

even though i prefer liszt to chopin, im not a big liszt fan.

Actually, if I count the number of Liszt pieces I like, it's far more than the number of Chopin pieces I like.

[franzliszt2]

Beethoven.

Seriously, I don't see why he's so effin great anyway. Plus EVERYONE plays Beethoven even if it's that god-fosaken piece of crap Fur Elise.

I hate beethoven with a passion, bach isn't great either though, but most people feel that way, so very few in my area play him for enjoyment (although most of his fugues are delightful)

Beethoven? ok thats bad enough but BACH!!!!!!!

[dnephi]

Beethoven? ok thats bad enough but BACH!!!!!!!

The line has been drawn.  Back away from my B's please. 

Mozart is underrated, as is Bach and so is Beethoven.  Liszt is underrated. I'd say.  Too often his weakest pieces are treated as if they were his best.

[pita bread]

Beethoven.

Seriously, I don't see why he's so effin great anyway. Plus EVERYONE plays Beethoven even if it's that god-fosaken piece of crap Fur Elise.

I hate beethoven with a passion, bach isn't great either though, but most people feel that way, so very few in my area play him for enjoyment (although most of his fugues are delightful)

Don't be hatin' on da Brotha

[tradge]

Beethoven? ok thats bad enough but BACH!!!!!!!

Hear hear!

[webern78]

Actually, if I count the number of Liszt pieces I like, it's far more than the number of Chopin pieces I like.

Maybe it has to do with the fact Liszt lived nearly twice as long as the former. Even then, i still rank Chopin much higher, which says something about both composers...

[imbetter]

Beethoven.

Seriously, I don't see why he's so effin great anyway. Plus EVERYONE plays Beethoven even if it's that god-fosaken piece of crap Fur Elise.

I hate beethoven with a passion, bach isn't great either though, but most people feel that way, so very few in my area play him for enjoyment (although most of his fugues are delightful)

what have you been smoking...

[arbisley]

I might add a few comments of my own concerning my tastes. I personally love most of the maybe "overplayed" or well known composers, but I have never really known them for being popular in the sense that I hardly ever meet anyone who knows them.
I suppose that's back to the comment about pop music compared to classical.

Second I don't see composers individually as over or underrated, some are just played far more than others, possibly because they are more musical, possibly because they had better connections, publicity whatever. I always look at individual pieces for their interest, and tyr to find new ways of looking at them which make sense to me, even if they are overplayed such as the Pathetique.

Rachmaninoff was criticised by a lot of his fellow music students for adhering to cliches, I suppsoe like Andrew Loyd Webber today possibly, but there is so much depth and intensity  to his music which in loyed Weber is just slushy and sentimental.

I can understand why people don't like Bach or Mozart, but being born in Austria it means so much to me to hear music by these composers, so simple, yet so heartfelt, true to their thoughts. What I hate is some people here in England for instance who just go "Brahms is crap" on the basis of one symphony, and stick to that opinion until they find the absolutely best example of his stuff.

A very important thing to remember is that often composers were churning out music in great quantities to earn a living, they had no time to be vastly original or try to develop new styles. A true work of genius could not stand on its own if there wasn't an ocean of musically interesting but perhaps just entertaining music available. Another thing I find bad is how pieces are learnt for such a long long LONG time, done to death, so that it is completely  unspontaneous and it takes forever to acquire repertoire.

my jazz piano teacher interestingly was also saying that music today is far too technical, and not enough of the heart. So that is possibly why many composers are discarded as overrated because there is no time and space to enjoy them in all their richnnes and context than just simply for intensely crammed pieces.

[elevateme_returns]

what have you been smoking...

what? i said i like beethoven and bach, and you said "what a load of rubbish"

this guy says he DOESNT like them, and you say "what have you been smoking.." !!!

when are you gona learn not to go with the crowd. make your own decisions

[elevateme_returns]

Actually, if I count the number of Liszt pieces I like, it's far more than the number of Chopin pieces I like.

same here! i find chopin to be a bit  boring sometimes. but some pieces are fabulous. in my opinion the 24 preludes are the best things he wrote. each one a gem... well.. almost each one

[soliloquy]

Here's your answer.

That's not even close to an answer.  I HAVE done harmony analysis on works of both composers of course, and it is completely... well a total lie to say Liszt's music is less harmonically complex than Brahms'.  That statement is utterly absurd.  The fact that he lists some pieces by Liszt doesn't mean anything at all; it just means he can list pieces.  I can copy/paste the entire works of Brahms into here and say "these pieces are simple", and my argument would be equally as valid as that trash.

[tompilk]

Beethoven.

Seriously, I don't see why he's so effin great anyway. Plus EVERYONE plays Beethoven even if it's that god-fosaken piece of crap Fur Elise.

I hate beethoven with a passion, bach isn't great either though, but most people feel that way, so very few in my area play him for enjoyment (although most of his fugues are delightful)

i had this impression before i played any, but i'm liking it more now. His 3rd concerto is one of my favourites...
Tom

[elevateme_returns]

That's not even close to an answer.  I HAVE done harmony analysis on works of both composers of course, and it is completely... well a total lie to say Liszt's music is less harmonically complex than Brahms'.  That statement is utterly absurd.  The fact that he lists some pieces by Liszt doesn't mean anything at all; it just means he can list pieces.  I can copy/paste the entire works of Brahms into here and say "these pieces are simple", and my argument would be equally as valid as that trash.

what about brahms' canons ? have you harmonically analysed those?

[elevateme_returns]

That's not even close to an answer.  I HAVE done harmony analysis on works of both composers of course, and it is completely... well a total lie to say Liszt's music is less harmonically complex than Brahms'.  That statement is utterly absurd.  The fact that he lists some pieces by Liszt doesn't mean anything at all; it just means he can list pieces.  I can copy/paste the entire works of Brahms into here and say "these pieces are simple", and my argument would be equally as valid as that trash.

its hard to sum up the entire works of both composers into a who is more harmonically advanced argument.  franz was just naming liszt pieces that are simple harmonically in comparison to brahms.

i feel like good music is like a good essay. .  its hard to describe why it's good... it just seems to flow. brahms seems to do that a lot more for me than liszt.

[soliloquy]

its hard to sum up the entire works of both composers into a who is more harmonically advanced argument.  franz was just naming liszt pieces that are simple harmonically in comparison to brahms.

i feel like good music is like a good essay. .  its hard to describe why it's good... it just seems to flow. brahms seems to do that a lot more for me than liszt.

Franz's list is almost as ridiculous as his claim; I would be very hard-pressed to find someone to agree with him when he says that works like Chasse-Neige or Fusees, or Hungarian Rhapsody No. 12, or certainly Piano Concerto No. 2 are harmonically plebeian.  And keep in mind, he is listing some of the more encore-type pieces, not the masterworks such as the Sonata, Venezia e Napole, the Harmonies Poetiques et Religiouse, Annees des Pelerinage, Ballade No. 2 etc.  Also, the transcriptions?  How absurd; would the harmonies in his transcriptions not be the harmonies of OTHER composers?  Are you willing to agree with him when he says that, for instance, the harmonies of WAGNER are simple?  When someone says something as stupid as that, they lose any/all credit in my mind, and his statement as to having analysed the works of Liszt becomes incredibly suspect.

As far as the second part of your statement, perhaps Brahms' music is more like an essay, but shouldn't music be poetry?  Brahms' music, for the most part, just plugs along, concluding in only the ways we could expect from the metaphorical thesis it presents in its first paragraph, with the occasional quickly-resolving, ear-pleasing suspension and appoggiatura here and there in the middle.  Liszt's music sings, Brahms' music talks.  I think you summed it up quite well.

[elevateme_returns]

Liszt's music sings, Brahms' music talks.  I think you summed it up quite well.
As far as the second part of your statement, perhaps Brahms' music is more like an essay, but shouldn't music be poetry?

yes soliloquy thats EXACTLY what i wanted to say. youre so perceptive. 

i dislike liszt apart from a few pieces. i like all brahms except last mvt of 2nd piano concerto.

also, to me im an english student, a perfect essay is waaay more beautiful than perfect poetry. essays are a LOT harder to write. remember that.

[elevateme_returns]

Franz's list

seriously did no one notice that ^^ ?? PUN

[nicco]

i dislike liszt apart from a few pieces. i like all brahms except last mvt of 2nd piano concerto.

also, to me im an english student, a perfect essay is waaay more beautiful than perfect poetry. essays are a LOT harder to write. remember that.

Well, thats your opinion, not a fact.

As for this discussion, Liszt and Brahms are too different. Soliloquy summed it up quite nicely. Some people prefer Brahms because the music speaks to them in a way that no other composer does. The same for Liszt.

And claiming either composer has poor harmonic structure, well, that really shows a clear lack of understanding, and disrespect towards the composer and his followers.

But of course, given the same thematic material as Brahms had, im sure you could do much much better, no?

[elevateme_returns]

i never claimed either had poor harmonic structure.

and thats not actually what soliloquy said, he actually said "liszt sings, brahms speaks."

BIASED

[nicco]

Do you even know yourself what you are saying? For an english student you sure dont express yourself very clearly.

[dnephi]

Look, Brahms and Liszt were actually extremely similar if you get hardcore into analysis.  Brahms' canonic imitation is often dry, though superb.  At the same time, Liszt's use of sequences is just as sophisticated as Brahms'. 

I don't like all of Liszt, but I love much of it.  Brahms is different.

Let's stop hammering both.

Thanks,

Dan

[elevateme_returns]

Do you even know yourself what you are saying? For an english student you sure dont express yourself very clearly.

----

[elevateme_returns]

look, its hard to describe in words why brahms is better than liszt, it really is. but let me have one last go.

i KNOW FOR A FACT that these are the 4 composers to have acheived true genius in their lifetime

The 3 Bs and M
Bach, Beethoven, Brahms and Mozart. (MAYBE purcell. but many will argue. you have to have heard a lot of purcell to argue mind - if you havent, get out there and listen to some.)

bach for basically everything he wrote, b minor mass , WTC, goldberg etc.
beethoven for symphony no 9 , late string quartets and the late sonatas
brahms for the 1st (and maybe 2nd... minus last mvt) piano concerto, symphonies & late piano pieces
and mozart for the jupiter symphony, in particular the fugal last movement. maybe the requiem too.

because mozart acheived genius at a much earlier age than the others, it makes you wonder how amazing the music he'd have written later in his life would have been had he lived on longer. he really was the greatest prodigy ever.

all the others, what have you, mendelssohn, schubert, chopin, debussy, stravinsky, ravel etc theyve all written fabulous music and its really really good. but i KNOW FOR A FACT THAT its not genius like those 4 giants ^^^^ schubert is close sometimes. well they all are really.

if you dont understand that, or if it's not worded well enough, then sorry. but im SURE thats right

and its not just my opinion, more often than not id much rather listen to liszt than bach.
 
but i know that bach's music was genius, you can just feel it, its hard to explain, and although people like liszt or chopin's music is brilliant in many ways i just KNOW FOR A FACT THAT its not on the same musical level as bach brahms beethoven or mozart.

[nicco]

i consider these 4 composers to have acheived genius in their lifetime

i just dont think its genius like those 4 giants

and its not just my opinion

right..

[elevateme_returns]

*** off!!! jesus. if you would just be so kind as to read my post properly and not just pick out the nitty bits that might suggest its opinionated you would realise how stupid your reply is!! i really cant be bothered to explain. but what the hell, il do it anyway.

brahms at his best wrote better music than liszt at his best. fact.

IT COULD BE SAID THAT my opinion was that those 4 composers acheived genius. and thats an EXTREMELY valid opinion. probably closer to fact than opinion. others will argue its not true. but what do they know. and more importantly, what does it matter - i know the truth.

and i said "i dont think" and less blatant expressions to try and be polite to you & show more respect. but if you want me to be blatant and obvious then please go ahead and read my modified post ^^^

[nicco]

First you write a few sentences about how you think bach, beethoven, brahms and mozart are geniuses. You make various claims about composers that clearly is your opinion and speculation.

Then you claim its not your opinion? Everything you wrote is your own opinion, and its not supported by facts.

[elevateme_returns]

anyone that thinks otherwise is wrong. FACT.

add purcell to the list of geniuses, but his output is nowhere near as big as those 4.

my favourite composers are scriabin, rachmaninov schubert, etc. brahms too. but bach and beethoven are not top of my playlist.

but i KNOW that those four i mentioned write the best music. even though a lot of it isnt to my taste, i realise, understand and accept that its simply genius.

[nicco]

Well, that would mean what you think is best is a fact, wich it isnt. The term "better" is a highly individual claim, wich is supported by our personal opinion.

[elevateme_returns]

OMG ITS COMMON SENSE MATE

BACH BEETHOVEN BRAHMS MOZART ALL ACHEIVED GENIUS

AND THEY WERE THE ONLY COMPOSERS TO DO IT.

maybe purcell...   not quite sure

[elevateme_returns]

Well, that would mean what you think is best is a fact, wich it isnt. The term "better" is a highly individual claim, wich is supported by our personal opinion.

really. so real madrid are better than doncaster.  OMG OPINION OPINION

evgeny kissin has a better technique than me. OMG JUST OPINION MATE JUST OPINION

seriously, to any great musician it should be obvious fact that the music of bach beethoven mozart and brahms is in a different league to all others.

the opinionated stuff comes in the bit where people say, "oh, my favourite piece is so-and-so, or, oh, my favourite composers are so-and-so"

like you can tell that chelsea are better than carlisle, you can tell that bbbm are better than all the rest.

[dnephi]

You mean BBBL

[elevateme_returns]

no liszt work is better than last two mozart symphonies

[nicco]

Music is not football. A definiton of music could be

Music is an art form consisting of sound and silence expressed through time. Elements of sound as used in music are pitch (including melody and harmony), rhythm (including tempo and meter), and sonic qualities of timbre, articulation, dynamics, and texture.

Now, people experience these elements in different ways, each is individual. You could say that Liszt composed better music then me, but who can really decide that, other then the individual listener? My point is, music is such a personal thing, that putting labels on compositions and comparing them to eachother is simply wrong, and only gives us an idea about how our personal feelings are.

[franzliszt2]

no liszt work is better than last two mozart symphonies

I agree

[elevateme_returns]

if you cant see that bach beethoven brahms and mozart are the best, unlucky. from now on thats your problem.

[nicco]

Well if you could convince me as to WHY they are "best", then maybe i could understand you, but you still havent given a single argument of the sort.

[oscarr111111]

This guy HAS to be joking.

[elevateme_returns]

yeaaah man im joking bach is so sh*t!!! how can anyone call that music!!?!?!

and late beethoven!???!! THATS SO sh*t ITS SO SLOW WHERES THE SPEED MAN WHERES THE SPEEEEEED

OMG TELL YOU WHATS MINT WICKED COOL CHOPIN ETUDE OP 10 / NO 4 ITS SO FASST MAN YEAH THATS WHAT YOU CALL REEEAL MUSIC.  none of that bach sh*t god bachs rubbish its so slow and boring HAHA FUGUES ANYONE COULD WRITE THOSE BUT NAAA CHOPIN AND LISZT THEYRE THE TRUE GODS OF MUSIC FAST FAST FAST YEAHHHHH

ALSO LISZT HUNGARIAN RHAPSODIES YEAH MAN MAN FAST FAST
ALL STUDIES YEAH YEAH  FAST FAST FAST FAST although some are fabulous music.
SONATA IN B MINOR YEAH MAN OCTAVE OCTAVE OCTAVE OCTAVE END!!!!!!! but also a very fine piece.

i wish you could appreciate real music for what it is.....

[elevateme_returns]

Well if you could convince me as to WHY they are "best", then maybe i could understand you, but you still havent given a single argument of the sort.

on a more serious note nicco im afraid i cant convince you, its just something you will have to realise yourself as your musical taste develops and matures.  didnt barenboim once say, whats the point in any other music apart from the well tempered klavier books?

[tradge]

no liszt work is better than last two mozart symphonies

Last THREE Mozart Symphonies, I much prefer 39 over the other 2

[dnephi]

There's a lot of speed in late Beethoven.

And while you're at it, not really much of it in late Liszt.

And I disagree about the last Mozart Symphonies.  Besides, we're discussing keyboard compositions.  No Mozart keyboard work is greater than the Liszt Sonata.

Dan

[nicco]

on a more serious note nicco im afraid i cant convince you, its just something you will have to realise yourself as your musical taste develops and matures.  didnt barenboim once say, whats the point in any other music apart from the well tempered klavier books?

Maybe he did, but again, wouldnt that be his opinion? And try looking at how you expose yourself on this forum before you start talking to me about maturity. I can assure you i have more than enough knowledge about all the greatest composers, and refuse to rank anyone other than by my personal taste.

[elevateme_returns]

then have fun doing that, and i wish you all best for the future x

[elevateme_returns]

There's a lot of speed in late Beethoven.

And while you're at it, not really much of it in late Liszt.

And I disagree about the last Mozart Symphonies.  Besides, we're discussing keyboard compositions.  No Mozart keyboard work is greater than the Liszt Sonata.

Dan

i'd say most of the concertos were better.

[oscarr111111]

yeaaah man im joking bach is so sh*t!!! how can anyone call that music!!?!?!

and late beethoven!???!! THATS SO sh*t ITS SO SLOW WHERES THE SPEED MAN WHERES THE SPEEEEEED

OMG TELL YOU WHATS MINT WICKED COOL CHOPIN ETUDE OP 10 / NO 4 ITS SO FASST MAN YEAH THATS WHAT YOU CALL REEEAL MUSIC.  none of that bach sh*t god bachs rubbish its so slow and boring HAHA FUGUES ANYONE COULD WRITE THOSE BUT NAAA CHOPIN AND LISZT THEYRE THE TRUE GODS OF MUSIC FAST FAST FAST YEAHHHHH

ALSO LISZT HUNGARIAN RHAPSODIES YEAH MAN MAN FAST FAST
ALL STUDIES YEAH YEAH  FAST FAST FAST FAST although some are fabulous music.
SONATA IN B MINOR YEAH MAN OCTAVE OCTAVE OCTAVE OCTAVE END!!!!!!! but also a very fine piece.

i wish you could appreciate real music for what it is.....

Kid, you need to log off the internet and get a life.  Also a word of advice, the 'play dumb and act sarcastic' trick doesn't work on the internet, it just makes you look like a stupid immature shut in with too many hours logged online.

[elevateme_returns]

why are you on the internet then? i mean to be honest, its sad enough that we're on a piano forum. i just make comments like that for laughs. internet isnt serious

[elevateme_returns]

This guy HAS to be joking.

why? bach beethoven brahms and mozart are the best by miles. even though theyre not my favourite

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Works for keyboard: D. Scarlatti > Mozart. Also Haydn > Mozart.

[oscarr111111]

why are you on the internet then?

I've got a cover gig coming up that I need to work on songs for, I've been transcribing/memorizing/practicing them most of today.  Since I'm at the computer anyway I check a few forums every 30 mins or so.

its sad enough that we're on a piano forum. i just make comments like that for laughs. internet isnt serious

I have laughs with my real life friends, I come to a piano forum to gain information and insight into piano playing and piano music.