Most Important Composer For Each Era

[poiuytrewq11zc]

Who do you believe to be the most important composer for each musical era?

-Renaissance (pre-baroque)
-Baroque
-Classical
-Romantic
and all of the modern sub-categories (impressionism, ragtime, minimalism, etc.)

[liszt_ani_rach]

Renaissance- Palestrina
Baroque- Bach, Handel
Classical -Mozart, Beethoven
Romantic- Chopin, Tchaikowsky.

Liszt would fit into Romantic, but his music was too violent(lol)..so i didnt include him..

[healdie]

Is this for piano Rep or all music?

if it's for all I would go

Pre- Baroque - Palestrina
Baroque - Handel (Bach is so ahead of his time it's almost not baroque)
Classical - Haydn
Romantic - Wagner
Post - Romantic - Schoenberg the twelve tone system is/was everywhere classical music, Jazz even some pop music Frank Zappa jumps to mind (I may possibly have gone Ives as well but Schoenberg was just a bit more influential)

I know it's not strictly 12 tone but it has Schoenbergs influence all over it

[chopinspride]

I will do two lists .

Piano repertoire.

Renaissanse - Probably Byrd. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that he published the first ever keyboard music?

Baroque - Bach. There is no other composer from this period who's works are more in the pianist's repertoire.

Classical - Clementi. Known as the "father" of modern piano techniqiue.

Romantic - Chopin. Revolutionized piano technique and made the piano "sing."

Early 20th Century - very difficult, but I think Debussy. Created "atmospheric" piano music. Introduced "colours."


All.

Renaissance - Monteverdi. Practically invented opera. (I know he didn't.)

Baroque - Bach. For Obvious reasons

Classical- Beethoven. Again, for obvious reasons.

Romantic - difficult. I can't say. They all developed their fields so much. Of course you could say Wagner, or Brahms, or Tschiakowsky. You could probably justify any romantic composer as being the most important.

20th Century - Again. Like above.


John 3:16

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

[scott13]

My list:

1) before baroque - Montiverdi (excuse spelling)
2) Bach - (Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin all drew from Bach's traditions so his place and influence on       musical history is evident)
3) Beethoven - (By far the most influential in the classical period)
4) Chopin - (His advancement of piano writing changed the face of classical piano music forever, especially the etudes and piano concertos)
5) Stravinsky (Rite of Spring was the foundation of atonality in music, Schoenberg may have gone further but Stravinsky began the work with this piece)

[retrouvailles]

5) Stravinsky (Rite of Spring was the foundation of atonality in music, Schoenberg may have gone further but Stravinsky began the work with this piece)

Uh, what? The Rite of Spring is not atonal. It has key signatures for a lot of it, and it has clearly established tonal centers. Yes, the harmony is not common practice, but it is not atonal. Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire, an earlier work than the Rite of Spring, really is an atonal (but not 12 tone) work and this is really a major foundational work in atonality.

[healdie]

5) Stravinsky (Rite of Spring was the foundation of atonality in music, Schoenberg may have gone further but Stravinsky began the work with this piece)

And the Holdiay Symphony by Charles Ives was written mainly before the Rite and this has some Atonal parts that go beyond Schoenberg (check out the 3rd movement which has the orchestra split into 4/5 sections and they each are playing in different times/tempos and keys) so the Rite was fairly behind the game in terms of Atonality not to diminish the work at all though as it still remains one of my favourites

[scott13]

And the Holdiay Symphony by Charles Ives was written mainly before the Rite and this has some Atonal parts that go beyond Schoenberg (check out the 3rd movement which has the orchestra split into 4/5 sections and they each are playing in different times/tempos and keys) so the Rite was fairly behind the game in terms of Atonality not to diminish the work at all though as it still remains one of my favourites

Yes but Ives was not well known in Europe as he lived outside the main musical sphere. Also Rite of Spring is Atonal in my opinion. It does not have a clear tonal centre, more a rhythmic centre. And if you analyse the harmony it is certainly not tonal as was known in Europe at that time, hence my conclusion the work is in fact atonal.

Also no argument Ives was further ahead, but his significance on western musical history is limited as he did not live in Europe and despised the entire art music tradition that was the foundation of classical music, therefore he did not have a profound impact on 20th C music, and in-fact his works were not often performed in his own lifetime and only recently (1960's onwards) has there been a growing admiration for his works.

[retrouvailles]

Yes but Ives was not well known in Europe as he lived outside the main musical sphere. Also Rite of Spring is Atonal in my opinion. It does not have a clear tonal centre, more a rhythmic centre. And if you analyse the harmony it is certainly not tonal as was known in Europe at that time, hence my conclusion the work is in fact atonal.

It does not have a constant tonal center throughout the whole work, but it is implied in most cases throughout the piece. Atonal means that it is completely devoid of any sort of tonal center or tonal harmony of any form, and that is not the case with this piece. I did mention that it does not use typical common practice harmony, but on the other hand, it still uses key signatures and implies tonality, which pretty much invalidates any sort of atonal label. Look at the earlier Pierrot Lunaire for a true atonal piece.

[ahinton]

I will do two lists .

Piano repertoire.

Renaissanse - Probably Byrd. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that he published the first ever keyboard music?

Baroque - Bach. There is no other composer from this period who's works are more in the pianist's repertoire.

Classical - Clementi. Known as the "father" of modern piano techniqiue.

Romantic - Chopin. Revolutionized piano technique and made the piano "sing."

Early 20th Century - very difficult, but I think Debussy. Created "atmospheric" piano music. Introduced "colours."


All.

Renaissance - Monteverdi. Practically invented opera. (I know he didn't.)

Baroque - Bach. For Obvious reasons

Classical- Beethoven. Again, for obvious reasons.

Romantic - difficult. I can't say. They all developed their fields so much. Of course you could say Wagner, or Brahms, or Tschiakowsky. You could probably justify any romantic composer as being the most important.

20th Century - Again. Like above.

What? No one at all during the last 100 years or so?

John 3:16

He wasn't a composer, so why mention him here?

Best,

Alistair

[fftransform]

What does "important" mean?  Seems terribly subjective and arbitrary, evidenced by Tchaikovsky's mention in this thread.

[chopinspride]

What? No one at all during the last 100 years or so?


Best,

Alistair

I was trying to the of "important." Who is the most important 20th century composer? Bartok? Britten? Bernstein? Copland? Gershwin? Ives? Debussy? Stavinsky? Glass?

I can't say I am afraid.

John 3:16

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

[ahinton]

I was trying to the of "important."

What does this mean? I presume that you've omitted a word or words here.

Who is the most important 20th century composer? Bartok? Britten? Bernstein? Copland? Gershwin? Ives? Debussy? Stavinsky? Glass?

Stravinsky(sp.) was once described in my hearing by a distinguished English soprano as not only one of the most overrated but one of the most unnecessary composers ofthe 20th century; needless to say, I won't name her! That said, it is indeed an impossible question to answer meaningfully.

You didn't respond to my question about your omission of more recent composers and the list that you put forward above contains only one living composer, two of the remainder having died some 20 years ago and tthe rest long before that.

John 3:16

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Once again, why is this here as part of every message that you post? If you must use it as a sign-off, please set it up accordingly so that your posts do not always contain off-topic material as they do now.

Best,

Alistair

[chopinspride]

Haha, I am just reading my post back now, it's the first thing I did this morning!
It was meant to be "I was trying to name the most "important."" When I am thinking of "modern" music, I think of the 20th century, as so I would take the "20th Century" as a musical period just like Baroque, Romantic etc. I my mind, an "important" composer will start off / develop a musical genre. So Debussy - Impressionism, Gershwin - Jazz in the concert hall, etc etc. The reason why I think earlier composers are more important than more modern ones is that the earlier composers built the foundations of what the later composers built on. This is why I would think that Debussy is more important than John Rutter.
I don't want to built what I have to say as a signiture as I think it deserves more than little small letters at the end of a post.

I post something something relevant and then I put this at the end.

John 3:16

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

[ahinton]

The reason why I think earlier composers are more important than more modern ones is that the earlier composers built the foundations of what the later composers built on.

That would presumably elevate Hildegard of Bingen to a position substantially above that occupied by Beethoven, then...

This is why I would think that Debussy is more important than John Rutter.

You don't say!...

I don't want to built what I have to say as a signiture as I think it deserves more than little small letters at the end of a post.

I post something something relevant and then I put this at the end.

But if its intended purpose in your posts is more than a mere signature, why does it appear at the end of every one of them irrespective of its being wholly off-topic? Apart from any other considerations, not only was the John whose words you purport to cite not Bach, Brahms or even Rutter, he lived many centuries before any of the music discussed here was written, so the purpose of the inclusion of this sentence into any, let alone all, of your posts about music is quite unfathomable.

Best,

Alistair

[werq34ac]

Pre-baroque: I don't know anything from this period. If there's anything amazing, enlighten me
Baroque: Bach followed by Handel followed by maybe Scarlatti? Bach was a genius among geniuses.
Classical: Mozart followed by Beethoven and Haydn probably..
Romantic: Not just Chopin I would say. Chopin's music is some of the most beautiful music ever composed, but Liszt revolutionized piano technique. Then there's the 3rd B Brahms, and Schumann who's music really captures the spirit of romanticism.
20th century: this is a really broad category... Rachmaninoff? Prokofiev? Stravinsky? Ravel? Debussy? Shostakovich? All valid candidates and I'm probably missing a few.

[outin]

Obviously some of us find it disturbing, so could you just please leave it out in the future? I'm sure you have already made your point and those who could somehow benefit from it have already done so.

And it seems I don't know how to quote messages correctly, sorry...

[fftransform]

Renaissance: Des Prez, Machaut

Intermediary: Monteverdi

Baroque: Handel, Purcell

Intermediary: Gluck, D. Scarlatti

Classical: Haydn

Intermediary: Schubert

Romantic: Liszt



20th/21st century music is where it gets complicated.  You could name school after school after school.  Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Cowell, Ives, Varese and Debussy are probably the most important early 20th century composers.  Babbitt, Boulez, Cage, Xenakis, Schaeffer, Stockhausen and Pousseur are probably the most important of the Darmstadt Era.  Ferneyhough, Dufourt, Radulescu, Lachenmann, Kurtag, Kagel, Ablinger and Stabler are probably the most important of the last 40 years or so.  Neoclassicism and minimalism aren't really "important" in the sense of the forwarding of music, but composers instrumental to their creation are Enescu, Bartok and Prokofiev, and Riley, Reich, Part and Gorecki, respectively.  Ustvolskaya, Gubaidulina and Schnittke are important figures in the late phase of Neoclassicism and deserve to be mentioned in their own right.

But if you really want to ask, "who is the most important person in contemporary classical music," the answer must be Pierre Boulez.  Boulez's control over the contemporary music scene - as director of IRCAM and the Ensemble Contemporain, both of which are basically the ATM for many contemporary composers (ones he deems worthy, and that is where his power comes in) - is utterly dominant.

[perfect_pitch]

I don't want to built what I have to say as a signiture as I think it deserves more than little small letters at the end of a post.

No it doesn't. Not when you put the same damn quote at the end of every damn post in the body of the text. It has NOTHING... absolutely NOTHING to do with the most important composer of each Era.

I post something something relevant and then I put this at the end.

No - you post something relevant, and then you cock it up by spouting religious BABBLE!!! Knock it off.

[richterfan1]

Baroque - Bach-----------------               
Classic - Mozart----------------Beethoven - but he is half romantic
Romantic - Tchaikovsky-------------                     Chopin - only piano(so he cant be the most imp)
Impresionissm - Shostakovich-----------

[pianoman53]

John 3:16

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Omg! How can you say that people you have never met will burn, jusdt because they don't believe in the same thing as you do?

1. Kindergarden called, they want their childhood stories back.
or
2. "I believe in santa claus. If you don't, you'll burn in h-ell forever, and no one will ever love you"

[williampiano]

Medieval: Hildegard von Bingen
Renaissance: William Byrd
Baroque: J.S. Bach
Classical: Ludwig von Beethoven
Romantic: John Field
Impressionist: Claude Debussy
Contemporary: Sergei Prokofiev

[healdie]

Contemporary: Sergei Prokofiev

ha ha ha What? he died in 1953 that wasn't even contemporary for my Parents in fact even for my grandparents Prokofiev was old news

[werq34ac]

Baroque - Bach-----------------               
Classic - Mozart----------------Beethoven - but he is half romantic
Romantic - Tchaikovsky-------------                     Chopin - only piano(so he cant be the most imp)
Impresionissm - Shostakovich-----------

Tchaikovsky, while composing beautiful melodies, is no where near the most important composer of the Romantic era. Chopin deserves the spot 100x more than Tchaikovsky. So what if he only composed for piano? Listen to his piano concertos, concert pieces for piano and orchestra, the cello sonata, piano trio, and then say that Chopin composed only for piano with a straight face.

And also, the viewpoint of Busoni was that all music is a transcription and the purest form of music was in the composers mind. Now this led to him believing his transcriptions were better than the originals but thats beside the point...
The point being, Chopin composed music with the most beautiful melodies and some of the most beautiful harmonies of the romantic era. Just because he composed for piano, you can't say he's not.

[point of grace]

-Renaissance (pre-baroque) Palestrina
-Baroque Bach
-Classical Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven
-Romantic Beethoven, Liszt, Paganini, Chopin for the piano, Schumann
and all of the modern sub-categories (impressionism, ragtime, minimalism, etc.)

impressionism Debussy
ragtime Jopplin
Expressionism Satie

[pianoman53]

Wouldn't it be more fun to, instead of just namedropping composers, actually discuss why you think they are the most important? I mean, it's not very difficult to randomly namedrop some of the great composers, and since they were the geratest, they must, in some way, also be important. Therefore, it's doesn't really tell anything with just namedropping...

[pianoplayjl]

1. Montiverdi
2. Bach
3. Beethoven
4. Chopin
5. Prokofiev
6. (greatest 21st century composer so far)John williams

Impressionism: Debussy

[49410enrique]

Hannon.

[49410enrique]

Hannon.

just kidding

[stoudemirestat]

Tchaikovsky, while composing beautiful melodies, is no where near the most important composer of the Romantic era. Chopin deserves the spot 100x more than Tchaikovsky. So what if he only composed for piano? Listen to his piano concertos, concert pieces for piano and orchestra, the cello sonata, piano trio, and then say that Chopin composed only for piano with a straight face.

And also, the viewpoint of Busoni was that all music is a transcription and the purest form of music was in the composers mind. Now this led to him believing his transcriptions were better than the originals but thats beside the point...
The point being, Chopin composed music with the most beautiful melodies and some of the most beautiful harmonies of the romantic era. Just because he composed for piano, you can't say he's not.

And Liszt deserves the spot 100x more than Chopin. There is no doubt in my mind that Liszt was the most important composer in the 19th century, even more so than Wagner. He changed the course of music forever. He was experimenting with the 12 tone technique, atonality, and strikingly modern themes decades before they were starting to become  prevalent. In his music, especially late, you  hear Debussy, Wagner (the influence on Wagner by Liszt was immense), Bartok, etc. He was basically the father of impressionism in music. He was absolutely a revolutionary.

As far as appeal for music goes, Chopin seems to trump Liszt (although I myself prefer Liszt, I love them both dearly though). But importance? It isn't close.

[pianoplayjl]

-Renaissance (pre-baroque) Palestrina
-Baroque Bach
-Classical Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven
-Romantic Beethoven, Liszt, Paganini, Chopin for the piano, Schumann
and all of the modern sub-categories (impressionism, ragtime, minimalism, etc.)

impressionism Debussy
ragtime Jopplin
Expressionism Satie

I wouldn't say Beethoven was a Romantic, eventhough some of his later compositions could be classified in that caterogry. He was considered more a CLassical musician. He did bridege the gap between Classical and Romantic music though.