Which are you favorite composers and why?

[joaosousa]

I know this topic already have been made, but tastes change so I'm asking again.

Who are your favorite composers and why?

For me Rachmaninoff because he is powerful, melodic and passionate at the same time.

Then Brahms (his simplicity makes is music beautiful), Prokofiev (his unique style), Chopin (his melodies, idk just love it)  and Debussy (his creativity) .

[8_octaves]

Hi joao,

my favourite composer for long years was Chopin. I like melancholic elements in music very much. But with the years, I - subjectively! - recognized that in Chopin's works the "dark side" overbalances / predominates. Then I learned about Gottschalk's works.

In the works of this composer, there are exotic, melancholic, and VERY special elements existant, which directly "speak to my soul". Many of them are "creole" elements, which are very difficult to describe, (e.g.: small intervals, ( i.e.: intervals with small offset, like seconds, which always must be singable, "small-parted / partitioned" elements from melancholic ideas / songs or compositions as well, but there's the POSITIVE, "fiery" side emancipated, and so, after MANY years, Gottschalk removed Chopin from position 1 of my favourite composers.

Nowadays, whilst him being my favourite composer for nearly as many years as Chopin had been before, I come to the conclusion, that I DISLIKE some of Chopin's works, because they contain "forced" dissonances and - in my PERSONAL SUBJECTIVE OPINION (! please note that! ) - unnecessary harmonies, which I don't like ( e.g.: play the middle section of Etude op. 10,3 SLOWLY, and I will get MAD and would like to throw it into a trashcan. I dislike those things very much now. And there are pieces of Chopin which, after 7239999 times playing through them, I nowadays find boring, e.g.: Prelude F sharp major, and Prelude A flat major. I don't like them, nowadays. )

I dislike "disharmonies" and "dissonances", too if they aren't dissolved VERY QUICKLY, and that's exactly what Gottschalk does, in such cases: He DISSOLVES QUICKLY, and is VERY melodical, and doesn't get on one's nerves ( again: this is MY PERSONAL OPINION, not representing any others'!! ). And he managed it, IN SPITE OF BEING very melodical, exotic and nice, to have composed VERY difficult and demanding works, which shows, that dissonant nonsense isn't necessary.

Sorry for my "hard" sounding rating, it isn't meant "aggressively", since, look: Chopin is number 2 still, and he'll keep his position: I like VERY MANY works of him very very much! 

But I won't deviate (for myself) one millimeter from it, pls take that for sure.

Here my favourite ranking:

1 ) Gottschalk
2 ) Chopin
3 ) Beethoven
4 ) Scarlatti
5 )  Schubert and Galuppi.

Very cordial greetings from Germany, 8_octaves!

[joaosousa]

-

[8_octaves]

I know this topic already have been made, but tastes change so I'm asking again.

Who are your favorite composers and why?

For me Rachmaninoff because he is powerful, melodic and passionate at the same time.

Then Brahms (his simplicity makes is music beautiful), Prokofiev (his unique style), Chopin (his melodies, idk just love it)  and Debussy (his creativity) .

Yes, we read your question already.

I think everybody can answer it for his own taste, and, additionally, say: "Why".

[joaosousa]

Hi joao,

my favourite composer for long years was Chopin. I like melancholic elements in music very much. But with the years, I - subjectively! - recognized that in Chopin's works the "dark side" overbalances / predominates. Then I learned about Gottschalk's works.

In the works of this composer, there are exotic, melancholic, and VERY special elements existant, which directly "speak to my soul". Many of them are "creole" elements, which are very difficult to describe, (e.g.: small intervals, ( i.e.: intervals with small offset, like seconds, which always must be singable, "small-parted / partitioned" elements from melancholic ideas / songs or compositions as well, but there's the POSITIVE, "fiery" side emancipated, and so, after MANY years, Gottschalk removed Chopin from position 1 of my favourite composers.

Nowadays, whilst him being my favourite composer for nearly as many years as Chopin had been before, I come to the conclusion, that I DISLIKE some of Chopin's works, because they contain "forced" dissonances and - in my PERSONAL SUBJECTIVE OPINION (! please note that! ) - unnecessary harmonies, which I don't like ( e.g.: play the middle section of Etude op. 10,3 SLOWLY, and I will get MAD and would like to throw it into a trashcan. I dislike those things very much now. And there are pieces of Chopin which, after 7239999 times playing through them, I nowadays find boring, e.g.: Prelude F sharp major, and Prelude A flat major. I don't like them, nowadays. )

I dislike "disharmonies" and "dissonances", too if they aren't dissolved VERY QUICKLY, and that's exactly what Gottschalk does, in such cases: He DISSOLVES QUICKLY, and is VERY melodical, and doesn't get on one's nerves ( again: this is MY PERSONAL OPINION, not representing any others'!! ). And he managed it, IN SPITE OF BEING very melodical, exotic and nice, to have composed VERY difficult and demanding works, which shows, that dissonant nonsense isn't necessary.

Sorry for my "hard" sounding rating, it isn't meant "aggressively", since, look: Chopin is number 2 still, and he'll keep his position: I like VERY MANY works of him very very much! 

But I won't deviate (for myself) one millimeter from it, pls take that for sure.

Here my favourite ranking:

1 ) Gottschalk
2 ) Chopin
3 ) Beethoven
4 ) Scarlatti
5 )  Schubert and Galuppi.

Very cordial greetings from Germany, 8_octaves!

I really appreciate your comment! I never heard of Gottschalk, but if you like him that much he has got to be good, could you suggest some works of him (so I could know him)?

Greetings from Portugal

[joaosousa]

Yes, we read your question already.

I think everybody can answer it for his own taste, and, additionally, say: "Why".

I'm sorry, instead of modifying the topic I quoted it by mistake.

[8_octaves]

I'm sorry, instead of modifying the topic I quoted it by mistake.

Rehi joao!

( No problem, since now it's clear to me!   )

That (your question )  isn't a very easy one for me, since I like ALL works of him.

But I would recommend the following ones, which are on YT:

1 ) Chanson du Gitano (pianist: Richard Burnett) ( I have the score of it, but it has been published by the NYPL ... ) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYZbmAO6Qy4

2 ) El Cocoye (pianist: Antonio Iturrioz ) ( please listen to it until the end, since there is the most mindblasting section I've ever heard in it, and I like it so much! (But, again, that's not representative! ) ) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pXRnT6dGIc

3 ) Every recording of "Bamboula" ( please check them out on Youtube ).

4 ) And many others, which you easily can find in YT via "Gottschalk" and some names of pianists following.

These three are only examples. Relevant pianists in the Gottschalk-area, are, for example:

Eugene List, Philip Martin, Cecile Licad, Ivan Davis, Robert DeGaetano, Jessy Braga (+ recently) , then the playlist of this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMwqwDkndiM , who is VERY good, I think, in the Gottschalk-area, then: Alan Mandel, and many others.

My personal "all - time- favourite" is a section in "El Cocoye", played by Iturrioz ( see above ), which is like that, that it creates tears in my eyes. But EQUALLY it's full of joy!

Cordially, 8_octaves!

PS.: This is only a very summarized "picture". Please check out for further ones!

Very cordially, 8_octaves!  

[joaosousa]

1 ) Chanson du Gitano (pianist: Richard Burnett) ( I have the score of it, but it has been published by the NYPL ... ) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYZbmAO6Qy4

2 ) El Cocoye (pianist: Antonio Iturrioz ) ( please listen to it until the end, since there is the most mindblasting section I've ever heard in it, and I like it so much! (But, again, that's not representative! ) ) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pXRnT6dGIc

Already listened to them and I enjoyed, I won't say that I prefer them over a polonaise of Chopin but they're beautiful

[thorn]

I heard my first Gottschalk at a piano festival a couple of weeks ago (his 'Souvenir de Porto Rico') and in a festival where everyone else was playing Brahms, Schubert and Rachmaninoff it was such a breath of fresh air. When I have the time I will definitely be exploring his music further.

I have far too many composers I am immensely fond of, so I'm just going to talk about one.

My favourite composer will always be Debussy. Though in terms of his piano music I don't like the pre-Estampes stuff. The majority of composers are very open with their craft, but Debussy is like a magician- it's all in the effect. Also as the pianist Noriko Ogawa says, most composers are incredibly emotionally demanding on us musicians, whereas Debussy leaves us alone to explore the sound worlds he creates- any emotion in Debussy is behind a veil and whenever he does remove the veil the emotion is more dazzling than in pieces that are pure emotion like the Romantics.

I think the c.1900s Spanish composers are massively underrated too. The Nights in the Gardens of Spain, Iberia and Goyescas deserve a mention in the same breath as all the 20th century French and Russians- and as Chopin and Liszt.

[alistaircrane4]

I will only list my "Top Five Composers" as a full list will be too long.

1. Frederic Chopin- Incredible melodies and a truly unique musical language. I can always tell by simple things if a piece was composed by him. There is something so unique and characteristic in his pieces that make it impossible to have been written by another composer. He was a true innovator and all of his works are still in play around the world today leaving nothing untouched.

2. Robert Schumann- In my opinion the most important German composer after Beethoven. He had an incredible way of reflecting his mental state in his pieces. He also could write amazing works for nearly all genres. His Sonata Op.11 contains my favorite movement of a sonata, this movement being the third. I cannot tell why I love it so much but something about it just really hits me.

3. Ludwig van Beethoven- He was the composer who's works I first played as the first piece I learned was the Sonata Op.13. If it was not for the "Adagio Cantabile" movement I would not be here writing this today. Even though my first exposure to piano works was Tchaikovsky's Seasons this was the piece which made me sit down and actually learn to play.

4. Sergei Rachmaninoff- In my opinion the greatest composer for the piano after Chopin's generation. His Preludes and Second Concerto are among my favorite works written. He was also the second composer who's works I had heard. The work was the Prelude Op.3 no.2. He could give the most powerful moments yet calm it with an amazing melodic longing and beauty.

5. Alexander Scriabin- In my opinion the only composer who could write beautiful atonal music. To me he is what Chopin would've been if Chopin had written atonal works. Bartok, Schoenberg, and co. wrote many atonal works but to me are very harsh and sound unpleasing. Scriabin took it and turned it into amazing beautiful works such as his Sonatas and others. He even wrote amazing tonal works. His Sonata Op.19, Fantasie Op.28, and Valse Op.38 are pieces I listen to at least once a day.

[diomedes]

and Galuppi.

What is it in Galuppi that appeals to you strongly? In the near future i plan to go through a lot of Scarlatti and Galuppi.

[cabbynum]

For me it is no contest for the no.1 spot. It has to be Schubert. HIs harmonies are magical and the construction is in a way that blows my mind. I still am not quite sure how he makes a theme that was once in minor come back in major and have it be even more sad. I know he didnt look at major and minor as happy and sad but still! His music speaks to me deeper than any other. I have shed many tears over his music. The unfinished symphony no.8 is just an incredible work and better than most completed symphonies of other composers. I am toying with learning the Godowsky Passacaglia on said symphony. It will have to wait about a month though as i have a few important deadlines coming up. I adore his music. I have a 6 cd changer in my car and if im not mistaken 4 of them are schubert the other two the Liszt ballades and legends and Bach partitas.

those also happen to be my 2nd and 3rd. 

1. Schubert
2. liszt
3. Bach
4. Beethoven
5. Alkan

[mjames]

I will only list my "Top Five Composers" as a full list will be too long.

1. Frederic Chopin- Incredible melodies and a truly unique musical language. I can always tell by simple things if a piece was composed by him. There is something so unique and characteristic in his pieces that make it impossible to have been written by another composer. He was a true innovator and all of his works are still in play around the world today leaving nothing untouched.

2. Robert Schumann- In my opinion the most important German composer after Beethoven. He had an incredible way of reflecting his mental state in his pieces. He also could write amazing works for nearly all genres. His Sonata Op.11 contains my favorite movement of a sonata, this movement being the third. I cannot tell why I love it so much but something about it just really hits me.

3. Ludwig van Beethoven- He was the composer who's works I first played as the first piece I learned was the Sonata Op.13. If it was not for the "Adagio Cantabile" movement I would not be here writing this today. Even though my first exposure to piano works was Tchaikovsky's Seasons this was the piece which made me sit down and actually learn to play.

4. Sergei Rachmaninoff- In my opinion the greatest composer for the piano after Chopin's generation. His Preludes and Second Concerto are among my favorite works written. He was also the second composer who's works I had heard. The work was the Prelude Op.3 no.2. He could give the most powerful moments yet calm it with an amazing melodic longing and beauty.

5. Alexander Scriabin- In my opinion the only composer who could write beautiful atonal music. To me he is what Chopin would've been if Chopin had written atonal works. Bartok, Schoenberg, and co. wrote many atonal works but to me are very harsh and sound unpleasing. Scriabin took it and turned it into amazing beautiful works such as his Sonatas and others. He even wrote amazing tonal works. His Sonata Op.19, Fantasie Op.28, and Valse Op.38 are pieces I listen to at least once a day.

Scriabin wasn't atonal though.

[thalbergmad]

1 ) Chanson du Gitano (pianist: Richard Burnett) ( I have the score of it, but it has been published by the NYPL ... ) :

I have on a couple of occasions been to see Richard Burnett and view his astounding collection of pianos and to hear him play Gottschalk. He lives only about 10 miles from me.

Not been for a few years, so I am not sure if he still plays. He is well into his 80's.

Thal

[themeandvariation]

For me, many composers rise to the level of favorite depending on the piece in question…  though many times composers aren't consistently great… except for Bach.
1. Bach (all the remaining  composers i mention rise to '2nd place' ..depending on the piece, and my mood)

 Debussy  (just about everything he wrote)

 Beethoven - especially the string quartets,  (and more than a handful of favorite sonatas, including op. 28, op. 53, along with the popular favs. : op.13, op.27#2) , i prefer the even numbered symphonies, but including the 5th.
 
Chopin

Bartok - especially the last 3 string quartets, music for percussion and strings.

Ravel

And then, i'd be remiss not to mention Gershwin,  Stravinsky, Elliot Carter (string quartets), Takemitsu, Subotnik, John Corigliano… .. Miles Davis' "Aura" by Palle Mikkelborg… and Stevie Wonder.
Cheers!

[8_octaves]

What is it in Galuppi that appeals to you strongly? In the near future i plan to go through a lot of Scarlatti and Galuppi.

I think it's the following:

Galuppi, being (roughly) in a position inbetween Scarlatti and Clementi, has written super sonatas.

I know - and have played - many of the "sonatas" of Scarlatti, which are well structured. One knows, what "comes"!

In Galuppi, if one, who is experienced with scarlatti, and would expect, e.g., the "end of a phrase" or a certain "finishing-set phrase", will face surprise, because, Galuppi very often , even if you think something "has ended", will attach further ideas, smaller ones, or longer ones, too.

Then, there's a second surprise which Galuppi holds for us: His sonatas (as far as I have some of them) aren't always the same in structure and form. One could - carefully - perhaps say, that in deviating from too strict formal aspects, he clears the path to further developments... . Clementi, Mozart, Beethoven...

He was a super composer, but scores might not too frequently occur. A very nice edition is the "silvery" one of Schott : "10 sonatas". Make sure you get the "10 sonatas"-version, because, unluckily, I got (seemingly) a misprint, which only 9 contains. And I've got somewhere a smaller book, copied from a library, in which additional sonatas of Galuppi are. But cannot find it at the moment!

As pianists are relevant, there's of course Michelangeli: Check him out on YT!  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcvz6V8K3_A

Cordially, 8_octaves!

[alistaircrane4]

Scriabin wasn't atonal though.

See his later works. All the sonatas after no.5 especially.

[thorn]

Scriabin's music isn't really atonal... he uses modes with altered degrees, he uses the octatonic scale (which comes from the diminished 7th chord), his colour wheel is built on the circle of fifths (you can't get more tonal than the circle of fifths!) and can be seen to play a part even in his later works such as Vers la Flamme.

[alistaircrane4]

Scriabin's music isn't really atonal... he uses modes with altered degrees, he uses the octatonic scale (which comes from the diminished 7th chord), his colour wheel is built on the circle of fifths (you can't get more tonal than the circle of fifths!) and can be seen to play a part even in his later works such as Vers la Flamme.

Atonal in the sense that you cannot place it in the conventions of normal tonality. It's true that he is guided by the circle of fifths but the dissonances and harmonic language is closer to atonality than it is to conventional standards. It's not like you can place a key on it and have it make sense is what I mean generally.

[visitor]

Scriabin's music isn't really atonal... he uses modes with altered degrees, he uses the octatonic scale (which comes from the diminished 7th chord), his colour wheel is built on the circle of fifths (you can't get more tonal than the circle of fifths!) and can be seen to play a part even in his later works such as Vers la Flamme.

+1.
I usually  describe his later work as more polytonal than atonal.  his music doesnt' have the ultra degree of strict organization that atonal (ala Schoenberg) contains, ie matrix series, etc.  His music doesn't make my ears bleed like the true plinkers that follow later in the middle to middle late century.

had Scriabin used rows etc and written atonally from the 2nd vienese school perspective or derivatives, I would suspect it would sound more like this

[thalbergmad]

To my ears, nothing compares to the lush romanticism of Schumann.

Oh the relentless memorable tunes, sewn together with reckless abandon as if God himself was talking to him.

The majesty and power, the sweeping statements. I just can't get enough.

Pure genius.

Thal

[diomedes]

I think it's the following:

Galuppi, being (roughly) in a position inbetween Scarlatti and Clementi, has written super sonatas.

I know - and have played - many of the "sonatas" of Scarlatti, which are well structured. One knows, what "comes"!

In Galuppi, if one, who is experienced with scarlatti, and would expect, e.g., the "end of a phrase" or a certain "finishing-set phrase", will face surprise, because, Galuppi very often , even if you think something "has ended", will attach further ideas, smaller ones, or longer ones, too.

Then, there's a second surprise which Galuppi holds for us: His sonatas (as far as I have some of them) aren't always the same in structure and form. One could - carefully - perhaps say, that in deviating from too strict formal aspects, he clears the path to further developments... . Clementi, Mozart, Beethoven...

He was a super composer, but scores might not too frequently occur. A very nice edition is the "silvery" one of Schott : "10 sonatas". Make sure you get the "10 sonatas"-version, because, unluckily, I got (seemingly) a misprint, which only 9 contains. And I've got somewhere a smaller book, copied from a library, in which additional sonatas of Galuppi are. But cannot find it at the moment!

As pianists are relevant, there's of course Michelangeli: Check him out on YT!  Smiley

Cordially, 8_octaves!

Interesting, thanks. I don't intend to play any of it. It's possible i suppose, i have been drawn to Scarlatti before so this isn't impossible. I wonder what the Soler Fandango would be like played on the piano at times. And yes, Michelangeli did program Galuppi which is quite interesting. I have a recording of what would be presumably all of what Galuppi wrote for the keyboard (played on harpsichord and such), that's the nature of my question.

And anyone that detects tonality in vers la flame, than they're probably seeing more imaginary things than just tonality in something that has very little relation to it.

The Wolpe was interesting to listen to. Hamelin is an alien, he can do anything casually.

[alistaircrane4]

To my ears, nothing compares to the lush romanticism of Schumann.

Oh the relentless memorable tunes, sewn together with reckless abandon as if God himself was talking to him.

The majesty and power, the sweeping statements. I just can't get enough.

Pure genius.

Thal

You're too much Thal. 

[8_octaves]

To my ears, nothing compares to the lush romanticism of Schumann.

Oh the relentless memorable tunes, sewn together with reckless abandon as if God himself was talking to him.

The majesty and power, the sweeping statements. I just can't get enough.

Pure genius.

Thal

Do i spot the apparitional misty silhouette of subtle irony in this posting, Mr. Thalberg?
...then I agree!   

Cordially, 8_oct!

[chopinlover01]

To my ears, nothing compares to the lush romanticism of Schumann.

Oh the relentless memorable tunes, sewn together with reckless abandon as if God himself was talking to him.

The majesty and power, the sweeping statements. I just can't get enough.

Pure genius.

Thal

Whatever you've been smoking lately, I'll take some! 

[Petter]

1 ) Gottschalk
2 ) Chopin
3 ) Beethoven
4 ) Scarlatti
5 )  Schubert and Galuppi.

I was positively impressed by Gottschalk when I first heard him. At the time I though it sounded like some proto jazz (Souvenir de Porto Rico) but of course the blues element and feeling is lack. Still, I'm pretty sure this must be where Scott Joplin were coming from (in part).
Also, Gottschalk seem to have lived a colourful and not too virtuous life, which is always encouraging.

[ahinton]

You're too much Thal. 

No. You can't have too much Thal!

Best,

Alistair

[8_octaves]

I was positively impressed by Gottschalk when I first heard him. At the time I though it sounded like some proto jazz (Souvenir de Porto Rico) but of course the blues element and feeling is lack. Still, I'm pretty sure this must be where Scott Joplin were coming from (in part).
Also, Gottschalk seem to have lived a colourful and not too virtuous life, which is always encouraging.

Hi Petter,

thank you for your statement.

After years of "research", I would discourage everyone to be of the opinion, that Gottschalk is "proto-jazz".

This bases on infos hard to discover, but existant, for example in the annotations Gottschalk's sister, Clara Peterson-Gottschalk, gave.

Because of the following:

She pointed out: "Why do they call by such a name ("ragtime") (wich is, by "lore", proto-jazz), simple syncopated elements of SPANISH origin?"

Via which we can assume: The "jazzy" elements have a much older origin than people would estimate, and they have already existed long before Gottschalk was born.

The most important "exotic" elements Gottschalk used in his works are elements derived from African music of the slaves, which is proved by dissertations ( e.g. : Amy Elizabeth Unruh, check it out, it should be easily findable), and moving Gottschalk into a "jazz" or "proto-jazz"-area, doesn't fit at all.

Additionally, there are factors, which HAD made Gottschalk's music subject of oblivion, because, his music was overplayed, at first, after he had died, ( for example: in every silent / mute-film), and only some Americans had tried to revive it. (Which I will prove in another special thread in the future.)

There were some "old" Gottschalkians, too, who tried to "revive" him, but at first such people didn't get attention. There were only 3 people, who, after the beginning of the 20th century (or / and  slightly before), had tried to revive his music, but it had needed time until TODAY. Today, he's gaining more and more DESERVED attention, as we can see on the ".fr" - website, on many pieces on YT, and on IMSLP.

He didn't want to be "popular" and "classic" music to be separated, but after his death, e.e. Irving Berlin and Whiteman took over his position, people (like Morton) arranged - not to his best - works of him, and the true nature of his music had sunk into mist.

But since many guys of the sources I mentioned have tried successfully NOW to bring him back into the marvellous, special position he bleongs to, I'm posititively looking, like the ancient Roman "auspices", into the future!!!

Another topic of interest is the influence Gottschalk may have had via (nonsense. JOPLIN's)  piano-teacher (who is now known by name ) to the works of Joplin. But as I said, I will point all those things in another single thread about Gottschalk later.

"Pasquinade", for example, isn't a "proto-ragtime-piece", but a concert-piece worthy to listen to in recitals. And NOT as an "encore" !! ( Sousa had made an arrangement of it, too, which can be heard on YT, but moving Gottschalk into the "Sousa"-corner is very bad, too, I think. )

But, in every case, and, nevertheless: MANY thanks to you for your answer!!

Very cordially, 8_octaves!



    

[ahinton]

Atonal in the sense that you cannot place it in the conventions of normal tonality. It's true that he is guided by the circle of fifths but the dissonances and harmonic language is closer to atonality than it is to conventional standards. It's not like you can place a key on it and have it make sense is what I mean generally.

What are these conventional standards of tonality and what do you perceive as being meant by that term? Who determines and establishes the convention and on what bases? Is Mozart's tonality the same as Berlioz's? - or Alkan's the same as Brahms's? What, for that matter, IS atonality in real terms? It's a relative, not a finite, concept, that's what.

The nearest that Scriabin ever got to moving away from tonality is in his last completed work, the five preludes Op. 74 but, even there, the bonds that seem to be getting loosened are not so much those of tonality per se as those governed by the so-called "mystic chord" (C-F#-A#-E-A-D), transpositions and inversions of which inform many of his later pieces and which is founded on that most natural of sonic phenomena, the harmonic series. The ways in which it gives rise to quartal harmonies - i.e. those built upon fourths rather than thirds as in triads - leads to different approaches to tonality, suggesting its expansion rather than its impending abandonment; Schönberg likewise (albeit from a quite different standpoint) was at the same time gravitating towards the use of quartal harmony - have a look at the opening of his First Chamber Symphony, Op. 9, for a classic example of this (although the work is still in E major - and doesn't he tell you so at the end!)...

Best,

Alistair

[Petter]

text

The "spanish tinge" is a part of jazz, and the same rhythm (if I'm not mistaken) that is used in that particular piece, so Gottschalk is more funky then his peers, which was what led me to my conclusion. Now I could care less if it's actually true or not.

[8_octaves]

The "spanish tinge" is a part of jazz, and the same rhythm (if I'm not mistaken) that is used in that particular piece, so Gottschalk is more funky then his peers, which was what led me to my conclusion. Now I could care less if it's actually true or not.

I think we have to be VERY careful here. I would rather recommend to have a look at this ancient art:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cante_jondo

But the difficulties we would have to face, are the CONNECTIONS and the mixing of elements.

Taken, that from very very ancient influences of oriental or African music, especially from the Moors, there came influences to Spain even before the baroque aera began, and , thus, may have influenced Spanish music, and were, perhaps , even adopted by Scarlatti, who was in Spain a very long time, and if we would presume that these elements were known to Gottschalk, since he was in Spain, too, and composed VERY important works like the "Chanson du Gitano", which offers many elements of the cante jondo (as is stated referring to the Gitano-song in the preface of the "little book of LMG", which I have) , then one perhaps could make one step towards the REAL sources of his music, or: the elements he often used.

He belongs to the field of Liszt and Chopin, not to the area of Saloon-pianists of the Joplin-area, we would conclude. But he has "additional features" none of the 2 others can provide. Because the "creole" elements, which are a mixture themselves, were known to him, in addition to maybe the very old influences of Spanish music, and that's what none of the 2 others can offer. But Moreau himself could easily adopt THEIR influences, too, as he was in France, too. He knew Chopin's works, e.g., very well, he debutated with the e-minor-concerto (Chopin himself praised him for his performance ), and he didn't like Liszt too much. But surely he was accustomed to his works, too.

So, he was able to compose pieces which offer MANY colorful, and maybe: many VERY VERY ANCIENT , primal elements, but also could easily shapeshift into a "normal" romantic composer, which is e.g. proven by his scherzo, or other works, which are more orientated on Chopin.

Very cordially, 8_octaves!

[thorn]

R.e. Atonality. I think for a composer, atonality is something of a muse rather than a tool. It's normally about how to disguise the tonal center through a multitude of tricks. The use of the term "atonality" by the general population is very much in the same sense a magician's audience refer to his art as "magic".

The first time I heard Gottschalk I thought he was Spanish. I don't know anything about the man but he has things in common with the Spanish composers- for example in the Moorish elements and in the neglect of his music.

To quote Albeniz's description of his unfinished Navarra, a lot of Black/Hispanic/Latino flavoured Classical music comes with the "shamelessly cheap" stigma. Alicia de Larrocha said that you play Spanish music in the same way you'd play a Chopin Mazurka- Albeniz said that Spanish music was very "simple"- so why is it the convention for teachers to tell their students to play it all as over the top and dripping with grease as possible?

[mjames]

See his later works. All the sonatas after no.5 especially.

I have. Long before I read your posts. Still isn't atonal.

[sabredancer]

3. Ludwig van Beethoven- He was the composer who's works I first played as the first piece I learned was the Sonata Op.13. If it was not for the "Adagio Cantabile" movement I would not be here writing this today. Even though my first exposure to piano works was Tchaikovsky's Seasons this was the piece which made me sit down and actually learn to play.

This. "Adagio Cantabile" is what made me want to take my piano learning seriously and it is still my favourite piece that I have learned.

[alistaircrane4]

This. "Adagio Cantabile" is what made me want to take my piano learning seriously and it is still my favourite piece that I have learned.

Although not my favourite this movement is truly beautiful in everyway and showed me a side of Beethoven I don't think I've seen since.

[diomedes]

Mine's going to be Scarlatti starting today. Yup. I'm planning to listen to all 36 hours of his harpsichord sonatas starting today. Me and my 1 litre german beer stein. And my cat. Here goes....

[inverted]

I think Rachmaninoff.

Excellent sense of form even in his short works, with there always being a sense of propellant motion towards some culmination.

Very unique harmonic "language": essentially very grounded in Russian tradition but injected with a massive dose of incredibly wild chromaticism. You can have whole passages of music pretty much progressing solely through chromatic or tritonal relationships, yet taking you from where you left off onto a clearly logical end point tonally. Plus a generous use of 9ths and 11ths, which is always nice.

Amazing melodic invention: his themes are always stunning. Add into that his ability to chop and change melodic material and you have a sense of taut, economical use of melodic material that rivals that of Beethoven imo.

Incredible gift for counterpoint: probably one his less noticed strengths, considering how strongly his music tends to focus on a single melody at a time. Funnily I think his sense of polyphony shows best in his piano writing as opposed to his orchestral music. His chamber music shows it well also.

[visitor]

in no particular order

- Viktor Kosenko - seriously. wow. two parts Rachmaninov, 3 parts early and  middle Scriabin, little bit of early Szymanowski, mix it up really good. serves up well chilled or warm.
ie

-  Scriabin. nuff said. game over.
    

- Kapustin - I mean really, have you heard/played it? Total boss.
loading eargasm

         - sub fav - Rosenblatt. yep.
        

few others will update by quote nxt time  

[j_menz]

But two of them are - gasp - alive. 

[visitor]

But two of them are - gasp - alive. 

oh no! you're right!!! I don't think that's allowed!