Is CHOPIN as 'Great' as Bach, Mozart, Beethoven?

[opus10no2]

Bach, Mozart and Beethoven are almost universally accepted as the 'Gods' of Music, the greatest of the 'Greats'.

But what does this even mean? Is their Music simply better? Is their output more consistent?

I'd like to put forward that Chopin in his own way - is an underrated composer. No, he wasn't a master of large forms, and didn't compose for diverse instrumentation. He never wrote a string quartet nor a Symphony.

But what he did write is so loved...loved as universally as those 'Big Three', but for some reason despite this Love he is not quite 'respected' on the same level.

Do you feel this is justified? Do you have any feelings to the contrary? I'm curious.

[stevensk]

Which tastes best raspberries or strawberries?  There MUST be a definitive, scientific answer!

[mjames]

10 different ways to make a stupid topic on pianostreet.

No Chopin isn't under-rated, no you shouldn't compare Bach or Mozart to Chopin considering they're in two different styles of music, and ranks in music are meaningless. It's not the olympics, especially since all the contestants have been dead centuries. Just stop with the silly comparisons and play/listen to who you like.

[georgey]

I agree with Mjames.  If you like to discuss for fun purposes only, here are my quick thoughts:

How LOVED is Chopin compared to Bach, Beethoven or Mozart?  Maybe look at how many pages there are of CD’s of his music in the Schwann catalog (I have 1994 version):

Bach 34 pages
Beethoven 34 pages
Mozart  51 pages
Chopin  11.5 pages

Chopin is loved 11.5/34 = 33.8% as much as Beethoven and 11.5/51=22.5% as much as Mozart.  Mozart is the most loved.

How GREAT is Chopin compared to Bach, Beethoven or Mozart?  Maybe look at how many pages there are of writing devoted to the composer in a music history book written by a great musicologist.  Looking at “A History of Western Music” by Grout (I have 3rd edition):

Bach 20 pages
Beethoven 29 pages (he has his own chapter)
Mozart  17 pages
Chopin  3 pages (he only wrote for the piano + 2 concertos)

Chopin is 3/29 = 10.3% as great as Beethoven.  Beethoven is the greatest.

Of course the quantity of music written by the composer will affect the above results.  This will give Mozart a big edge.  Could divide the total number of pages by the total hours it takes to perform all music written by the composer to get results that are independent of quantity.  But does quantity affect greatness, with everything else being equal?  I think so.

[opus10no2]

Thanks for that interesting post, Georgey.

I think the first two comments misinterpreted the point I was making.

These are not my subjective opinions, I was pointing out the perceived added 'respect' that the 'greats' have. I was not intent on discussing who people like more, but to discuss what exactly lays behind this and whether it has any bearing in reality to our actual enjoyment of Music.

Mjames in particular - I'm not interested in ranking Music, I'm most interested in enjoying it. I am however interested in provoking an understanding of exactly why there are perceived divides and 'rankings' in terms of respect.

I mean why is Bach 'respected' more than Chopin? There even seems to be snobbery among fans of 'classical' music. Why is Bach respected more than Lady Gaga or Metallica?

I'm not looking to rank thinks - but to find a way of distilling why many groups and individuals in society place rankings, looking down and up upon certain music and musicians.

[dogperson]

Thanks for that interesting post, Georgey.

I think the first two comments misinterpreted the point I was making.

These are not my subjective opinions, I was pointing out the perceived added 'respect' that the 'greats' have. I was not intent on discussing who people like more, but to discuss what exactly lays behind this and whether it has any bearing in reality to our actual enjoyment of Music.

Mjames in particular - I'm not interested in ranking Music, I'm most interested in enjoying it. I am however interested in provoking an understanding of exactly why there are perceived divides and 'rankings' in terms of respect.

I mean why is Bach 'respected' more than Chopin? There even seems to be snobbery among fans of 'classical' music. Why is Bach respected more than Lady Gaga or Metallica?

I'm not looking to rank thinks - but to find a way of distilling why many groups and individuals in society place rankings, looking down and up upon certain music and musicians.

I would even disagree with your original premise of lack of 'respect' or 'Chopin being underrated'.
Bach is not more respected that Chopin--- but rather, isn't his ranking based on his influence on subsequent composers? 

Again, what you are trying to find out from a post of forum members seems confusing: this issue of greatness belongs to musicologists, which we are not; and we, as pianists,  would not use the same rating system in defining 'great' or 'underrated' as they would.

[opus10no2]

I feel everyone's say is valid in some way, who is to say that musicologists should have the final word?

Bach's influence on future composers wasn't stylistic - Chopin's was.

How many composers after Bach sound like Bach? How many composers after Chopin sounded a bit like Chopin?   Early Rachmaninoff, Early Scriabin, Early Liapunov, etc.

To clarify - I'm not putting forward a premise - but simply instead attempting to deconstruct and understand an existing one.

Yes, we are comparing apples and oranges - but look on every 'top ten' list of Greatest composers....the top 3 are almost always Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, in varying orders.

Can we define why this is so?

[georgey]

 who is to say that musicologists should have the final word?

Musicologists are the experts. This is like asking: Why do the experts in music have the final word in saying who is great in music?  Answer:  Because they are the experts.  But musicologists do not get to choose who is the most loved.  People get to choose who is most loved maybe by buying CD’s of their most loved music.  (At least in the old days. This is why I used an old Schwann catalog.) 

[themeandvariation]

Georgey- best sales?
you mention:
"who is most loved maybe by buying CD’s of their most loved music."
Money as The measure of music's value?

kinda leaves out those who are poor - (or just choose not too buy.. strange idea, that; i know) but do appreciate- or Even play themselves!

 "musicologists"
Oh, should the purveyors of pattern comparison and a deep coding of such be the reigning judges?

What indeed Shall be the measure?…Is there such a thing as objective 'greatness'?

Does one need to fully understand composition to perceive the truest depth of compositional power and expressivity?
Or does that not matter, (or as much), as the most special performer giving life to the said piece in 'real time'… (or/and can THAT be sensed on a cd just as powerfully as a live concert?  
Or are composition and performance on equal footing in this assessment?
What if one doesn't play an instrument themselves? Should their vote count? or not as much, maybe? Or even more?

must go now.. (now, where are my keys?)

[musikalischer_wirbelwind_280]

To themeandvariation:

Just one more thing: did you intend some kind of pun with the last sentence of your last post? If so, loved it, if not...still loved it. 

M.W.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Musicology about classical music eew 

[georgey]

Yes, we are comparing apples and oranges - but look on every 'top ten' list of Greatest composers....the top 3 are almost always Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, in varying orders.

Can we define why this is so?

You are asking great questions.  I also ask questions.  

What does "greatest composer" mean?  Greatest composer means greatest as judged by history from my way of thinking.  Who is best to say how history has judged a composer?

Brahms is my favorite composer after Beethoven and Bach.  I love the Liszt piano sonata.  Brahms hated it.  Who is a better judge of the value of the Liszt piano sonata?  Brahms?  Me?  A great musicologist like Donald Grout?  The consensus of the musicologcal community?  Who is best to say how history has judged a composer or a particular work? What does Grout say about the Liszt sonata?  He says it is one of the outstanding compositions of the 19th century.  Was Brahms a bad judge of music?  But Brahms certainly was a better composer and musician than Grout, so why is Brahms not a superior judge?  

[opus10no2]

I'll add another interesting thing - modern Piano recital programmes are very deep and serious compared to what they used to be.

Students feel they have to study the 'serious' works. It's been passed down by purification of tradition - and I actually feel this purifying of 'classical potency' is what deters many people from being attracted to Piano by *fun* music.

I speak of Strauss waltz transcriptions. Not trash, but just not as 'deep' as the serious stuff.

You mention Brahms, I adore Brahms and you know who he adored and in some ways envied? Strauss!

Greatness can not really be measured in absolute terms, we have to first define - Great AT what? Great FOR what/whom?

You see - Brahms was the greatest at what Brahms did, and Strauss was the greatest at what Strauss did.

Also, Brahms is the 'God' of his style - but listen to Raff, Herzogenberg, Rontgen - I adore these composers also - They aren't as consistent nor as 'perfect in form' as Brahms but if you like Brahms you have a chance to like them also, although sadly they're largely forgotten. Variety is the spice of life as they say.

[georgey]

“You mention Brahms, I adore Brahms and you know who he adored and in some ways envied? Strauss!”

You are correct.  They were also friends. I like the photograph of Brahms and Strauss in Bad Ischl in 1894.  Strauss was 8 years older than Brahms but looks 8 years younger to me in that photograph.

I remember Herzogenberg from my Swafford biography on Brahms.  Swafford also mentions Raff and Rontgen.  I will take some time to listen to these 3.

On Raff: “Much of the hatred Brahms and Joachim felt for Listzean ideas rose from what became program music when it is percolated out among the petit-Liszts of the time – say Joachim Raff” and later “Actually Brahms, perverse as always, had a certain fondness of Raff’s music.”

On Heinrich Herzogenberg’s large quantity of work: Brahms was good friends with him and his wife.  Unfortunately, his wife kept sending Heinrich’s music to Brahms hoping Brahms would say a few kind words of encouragement to Heinrich.  This put Brahms in an uncomfortable position because he viewed Herzogenberg as a 2nd rate composer.

On Rontgen: Brahms promoted younger artist.  History remembers mostly his promotion of Dvorak.  But he was nearly as enthusiastic about Rontgen (also Knorr, Fuchs and Novak).

[chopinlover01]

Musicologists are the experts. This is like asking: Why do the experts in music have the final word in saying who is great in music?  Answer:  Because they are the experts.  But musicologists do not get to choose who is the most loved.  People get to choose who is most loved maybe by buying CD’s of their most loved music.  (At least in the old days. This is why I used an old Schwann catalog.) 

Musicologists are primarily academics, however experienced or well-read they may be.

To be involved deeply with the art, to me, is a much more viable metric for the authority they have.

As for the subject matter, Chopin was the greatest composer to ever live with regard to what he did; early Romantic solo piano work (his concerti are so-so). The reason I bring up the Romantic bit is because it's impossible (and an unfair comparison) to compare an artist from the past with one who could learn from that artist. For this reason, as gorgeous as Rachmaninoff's solo piano work is, I list Chopin as the greatest solo piano writer (perhaps Schubert as well, but there's a good debate about his categorization, and he really writes his solo piano things more like orchestra transcriptions).

[kalospiano]

it seems to me that, when it comes to piano specifically, Chopin is even more respected than the "big three"...
At least that's the idea I got by lurking around the web and talking to musicians and looking at the repertory of most pianists and schools, of which Chopin's etudes, preludes and nocturnes are often staples.
The most important piano competition, or at least one of the, shall we say, top three competitions in the world, is dedicated to Chopin.
So I'd say I don't really see how Chopin could be considered as an underrated composer.
As someone else said, he was simply the best at what he did, and the main inspiration of many who came after him.

[adodd81802]

Maybe it's just that I'm personally a big fan of Chopin, but I find his music so distinct, that even for pieces I may not have heard I could have told you instantly was Chopin. You just know. Whether that's due to re-using note combinations, or a particular formula he applies when writing his music, I don't know, but he made a statement.

I definitely think he connects with a certain type of person. For me personally, much like on a level you saw Gould fantasize about Bach. I don't get that anywhere near as consistently as I do with Chopin's compositions, so I'll always hold him on a pedestal above the rest in his own right.

HOWEVER. you read through a lot of his information on him as well as his 'comments / quotes' regarding particularly Bach and Mozart and for all considerations Chopin comes across a strongly opinionated so it would appear that if there were any truth in the statements he held them both with very high regard.

Chopin was very fond of Bach - He urged his piano pupils to practise Bach every day to strengthen their fingers and exercise their minds with the mathematical music.

Quotes
"Having nothing to do, I am correcting the Paris edition of Bach; not only the engraver's mistakes, but also the mistakes hallowed by those who are supposed to understand Bach (I have no pretensions to understand better, but I do think that sometimes I can guess)."

"The Official Bulletin declared that the Poles should be as proud of me as the Germans are of Mozart; obvious nonsense."

Interesting however, a comment by Schumann.

"We may be sure that a genius like Mozart, were he born today, would write concertos like Chopin and not like Mozart."

[chopinlover3]

Bach, Mozart and Beethoven are almost universally accepted as the 'Gods' of Music, the greatest of the 'Greats'.

But what does this even mean? Is their Music simply better? Is their output more consistent?

I'd like to put forward that Chopin in his own way - is an underrated composer. No, he wasn't a master of large forms, and didn't compose for diverse instrumentation. He never wrote a string quartet nor a Symphony.

But what he did write is so loved...loved as universally as those 'Big Three', but for some reason despite this Love he is not quite 'respected' on the same level.

Do you feel this is justified? Do you have any feelings to the contrary? I'm curious.

[chopinlover3]

Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven followed certain forms for composing music (Mozart and Beethoven were radicals for changing the forms). Chopin was more of a freelance composer which was amazing for the time period. Even though he followed some of the basic forms such as key changes in his developments in his sonatas he did his own thing in an astoundingly beautiful and virtuosic way. He also lived in Paris when he was at the height of his career which accepted cutting-edge music more than any other region. He depicts the wonderful Polish culture in his earlier works such as Mazurkas and Waltzes. Sorry, I'm new for posting here. I posted as a quote instead as a post.

[mad_tom]

Greatness is not a linear scale

[pianoplunker]

I agree with Mjames.  If you like to discuss for fun purposes only, here are my quick thoughts:

How LOVED is Chopin compared to Bach, Beethoven or Mozart?  Maybe look at how many pages there are of CD’s of his music in the Schwann catalog (I have 1994 version):

Bach 34 pages
Beethoven 34 pages
Mozart  51 pages
Chopin  11.5 pages

Chopin is loved 11.5/34 = 33.8% as much as Beethoven and 11.5/51=22.5% as much as Mozart.  Mozart is the most loved.

Could be the publishers figure it will take just as long to learn 11.5 pages of Chopin as it will to learn  51 pages of Mozart or 34 pages of Bach/Beethoven.