50 greatest composers

[Kapellmeister27]

I recently bought a book where a bunch of 'experts' compiled a list of the 50 greatest composers.  Just wanna see what you think.  Feel free to say if oyu agree, disagree, or think any composers that aren't on the list should be, or visa versa.

1.bach
2.mozart
3.beethoven
4.wagner
5.haydn
6.brahms
7.schubert
8.schumann
9.handel
10.tchaikovsky
11.mendolssohn
12.dvorak
13.liszt
14.chopin
15.stravinsky
16.verdi
17.mahler
18.prokofiev
19.shostakovich
20.r. strauss
21.berlioz
22.debussy
23.puccini
24.palestrina
25.bruckner
26.telemann
27.saint-saens
28.sibelius
29.ravel
30.rossini
31.grieg
32.gluck
33.hindemith
34.monteverdi
35.bartok
36.franck
37.vivaldi
38.bizet
39.mossourgsky
40.rameau
41.faure
42.rimsy-korsakov
43.donizetti
44.vaughan williams
45.smetena
46.j. strauss
47.von weber
48.janacek
49.couperin
50.borodin

obviously this list is based on their contributions to music, not on popularity

[lenny]

alkan should be on there.

but i like the high positioning of telemann, he is vastly underrated.

the most prolific composer ever actually, he wrote like 2000 hours worht of music.

[SteinwayTony]

I would put Liszt lower.  Way lower.

[lenny]

i wouldnt, maybe its partially due to the fact he lived so long, but he was the most innovative romantic.

[apion]

My personal top 20:

1. Beethoven
2. Bach
3. Brahms
4. Mozart
5. Wagner
6. Mahler
7. Schubert
8. Schumann
9. Bruckner
10.Stravinsky
11. Mendolssohn
12. Dvorak
13. Liszt
14. Chopin
15. Handel
16. Verdi
17. Berlioz
18. Prokofiev
19. Shostakovich
20. R. strauss

(I feel like I'm forgetting a composer)

[aquariuswb]

My personal top 20:

1. Beethoven
2. Bach
3. Brahms
4. Mozart
5. Wagner
6. Mahler
7. Schubert
8. Schumann
9. Bruckner
10.Stravinsky
11. Mendolssohn
12. Dvorak
13. Liszt
14. Chopin
15. Handel
16. Verdi
17. Berlioz
18. Prokofiev
19. Shostakovich
20. R. strauss

(I feel like I'm forgetting a composer)

Yeah: HAYDN :-)

[DarkWind]

Obviously the one who believes that Liszt should be put lower is thinking way too narrowly. This might be all subjective, but Liszt almost single-handedly helped recreate the piano into a much more versatile instrument, showing people the true capabilities, of it imitating the orchestra. On top of that, his later years harkened to impressionism, and even Ravel himself claimed that most composers (of his time) would not be here were it not for Liszt. Also, I would have put Dvorak and Tchaikovsky much lower. While they have pleasant music, they didn't contribute vastly. I'd shove Ravel a bit further up the list, and Bartok belongs WAY HIGHER in the list. What the hell is he doing all the way down there? Bartok is easily one of the most influential composers of the 20th century, even influencing modern composers directly today, such as the ever popular George Crumb.

[lenny]

Obviously the one who believes that Liszt should be put lower is thinking way too narrowly. This might be all subjective, but Liszt almost single-handedly helped recreate the piano into a much more versatile instrument, showing people the true capabilities, of it imitating the orchestra. On top of that, his later years harkened to impressionism, and even Ravel himself claimed that most composers (of his time) would not be here were it not for Liszt. Also, I would have put Dvorak and Tchaikovsky much lower. While they have pleasant music, they didn't contribute vastly. I'd shove Ravel a bit further up the list, and Bartok belongs WAY HIGHER in the list. What the hell is he doing all the way down there? Bartok is easily one of the most influential composers of the 20th century, even influencing modern composers directly today, such as the ever popular George Crumb.

innovation = greatness?

i dont entirely agree, rachmaninov is a perfect example of someone who wasnt terribly original(although he is vastyly underrated in this respect) and yet is undisputedly one of the greatest composers in history.

AND I JUST NOTICED!

RACH ISNT ON EITHER LIST! 

[SteinwayTony]

Obviously the one who believes that Liszt should be put lower is thinking way too narrowly. This might be all subjective, but Liszt almost single-handedly helped recreate the piano into a much more versatile instrument, showing people the true capabilities, of it imitating the orchestra. On top of that, his later years harkened to impressionism, and even Ravel himself claimed that most composers (of his time) would not be here were it not for Liszt.

That's fantastic, but he's not Top 15 material, in my view.  Anybody who composes (efficiently) for only one instrument, regardless of how much he "revolutionized" it, and despite how great of a performer, transcriber, and one-instrument composer he was, does not get very far in my book.  Don't get me wrong: Liszt composed some of my favorite piano works, but much of his orchestral works couldn't hold a candle to what he composed for the instrument about which he was most passionate. 

Of course, it's all subjective and whatnot.  Personal opinion. 

[Nordlys]

It is strange that Mozart is placed above Beethoven, or not? Never seen that before. Apart from that I guess we are not allowed to question the authority of the three Gods on the top of the list.

[Nordlys]

But...
Liszt was quite innovative, for example in harmony. One of the leading figures of the radical music of the 19th century. Most of the 'innovations' of Wagner were learned from Liszt. He also has many expressionistic pieces which are almost atonal. I would place Liszt above Wagner, but then I don't really like Wagner that much (maybe because of his rasistic views).

Then I would place Debussy above Liszt again, one composer who inspired most 20th century composers because of introducing the aspect of sound colours in composition.

And where is Olivier Messiaen??
Definitely one of the most important composers in the 20th c. He should be way up above Liszt, just like Bartok should.

[shasta]

Glad to see Ralph Vaughan Williams on there.   

[klavierkonzerte]

guys you forgot some very important and inflencial composers like

schonberg
alban berg
elgar
szymanowski
moscheles   (his piano concertos are extrodinary, all of them)
paganini    ( i can't belive no one mentioned him)
locatelli   (paganini of the 18th century, paganini's 24 caprices were influenced by him)
viotti        (many of the important 19 cen. violinist like jouchim, de beriot, vieuxtemps were influenced by his concertos even brahms)

[Nordlys]

Of course, Schonberg. The list is very incomplete.

But seriously, locatelli, viotti and moscheles as one of the most important composers?

[klavierkonzerte]

maybe not moscheles but viotti and locatelli are very very important in developing the violin techniques.

locatelli caprices, which were cadenzas to a set of his concertos, influenced paganini which influenced the WHOLE classical composers

[klavierkonzerte]

scarlatti is also important

[anda]

also balakirev - without him we might have never heard of mussorgski or rimski-korsakov!

and what about enescu?

[Nightscape]

So..... rachmaninoff, schoenberg aren't on the list.... but J. Strauss is!?


Is this another case of "the older the better" or something?  Why is Haydn is high on the list?

Is this a list of the greatest composers, or influential men in music?

I think Ravel is way too low on the list.  I mean, if Ravel's music is almost always perfectly written and perfectly orchestrated, shouldn't he deserve a little more credit?

And just because someone wrote thousands of mundane works, it doesn't make them a great, sincere composer. 

[Nightscape]

and where is Aaron Copland!?

[klavierkonzerte]

also balakirev - without him we might have never heard of mussorgski or rimski-korsakov!

and what about enescu?

enescu was a great teacher but i don't think he's an important composer

[Ed Marlo]

Maksim! Where for the love of Holy Cows is Maksim??

 

[anda]

enescu was a great teacher but i don't think he's an important composer

depends on what you know about him (have heard by him).

[Brian Healey]

I agree with Klavierkonzerte, Scarlatti is too improtant to be left completely off the list. He is almost singlehandedly responsible for the sonata form. He didn't create it, but he certainly demonstrated how to use it, and his sonatas were blueprints for later composers' interpretations of the form. Also, in agreeance with what other people have said, the absence of Shoenberg is perplexing.

I think I would also include John Cage among the top 50, and probably knock someone like Smetana off. Also, Bartok should be higher. I don't know, I could go on and on.

The list was just based on some person's opinion, it's not like it's the final word. Besides, I never saw anywhere that the list was a ranking from to best to worst, so it could just be in no particular order.


Dyno-mite!,
Bri

[lenny]

That's fantastic, but he's not Top 15 material, in my view.  Anybody who composes (efficiently) for only one instrument, regardless of how much he "revolutionized" it, and despite how great of a performer, transcriber, and one-instrument composer he was, does not get very far in my book.  Don't get me wrong: Liszt composed some of my favorite piano works, but much of his orchestral works couldn't hold a candle to what he composed for the instrument about which he was most passionate. 

Of course, it's all subjective and whatnot.  Personal opinion. 

thats a very superficial perception you have

chopin revolutionised the musical world, and all with 1 instrument

the instrument a piece of music is written for isnt important to any true deep musician

[lenny]

It is strange that Mozart is placed above Beethoven, or not? Never seen that before. Apart from that I guess we are not allowed to question the authority of the three Gods on the top of the list.

id put mozart way down, he doesnt stand out to me, he wasnt incredibly innovative.

his operas howevers are great, but frankly i dont hear more depth or greatness in his music than rachmaninov, beethoven, alkan, etcetera..

[lenny]

maybe not moscheles but viotti and locatelli are very very important in developing the violin techniques.

locatelli caprices, which were cadenzas to a set of his concertos, influenced paganini which influenced the WHOLE classical composers

i see, they were very important and innovative in the development of violin technique.

but the actual music that they wrote, what stands out about it aside from small superficial elements like that?

[lenny]

But...
Liszt was quite innovative, for example in harmony. One of the leading figures of the radical music of the 19th century. Most of the 'innovations' of Wagner were learned from Liszt. He also has many expressionistic pieces which are almost atonal. I would place Liszt above Wagner, but then I don't really like Wagner that much (maybe because of his rasistic views).

Then I would place Debussy above Liszt again, one composer who inspired most 20th century composers because of introducing the aspect of sound colours in composition.

And where is Olivier Messiaen??
Definitely one of the most important composers in the 20th c. He should be way up above Liszt, just like Bartok should.

liszt was more innovative than wagner, yes

but wagner was a profound musical genius, liszt never wrote anything of his scale

[aquariuswb]

thats a very superficial perception you have

chopin revolutionised the musical world, and all with 1 instrument

the instrument a piece of music is written for isnt important to any true deep musician

And what do you, lenny, know about being a "true deep musician?" I don't know how you find time to play the piano, considering you have 354 posts in 7 days (60 posts per day). And half of your posts are "" or ""... Just a thought...

[lenny]

And what do you, lenny, know about being a "true deep musician?" I don't know how you find time to play the piano, considering you have 354 posts in 7 days (60 posts per day). And half of your posts are "" or ""... Just a thought...

are you really ingorant or do you just look like a small plant?

you have no idea how skilled i am, i was simply accusing him of superficial perception

[aquariuswb]

are you really ingorant or do you just look like a small plant?

The former: I'm "ingorant [sic]," guilty as charged!

[lenny]

The former: I'm "ingorant [sic]," guilty as charged!

not wanting to go off topic here, but i have a wrist injury that has prevented me from practicing as much recently, and no i will not tell you how i got it

please stop picking on me   ( lenny in innocent lil puppy dog mode)

[SteinwayTony]

Lenny, I am extremely picky about the word "revolutionary."  Chopin may have had a substantial influence on the romantic era, but his "revolutionzation" was easily dwarfed by that of Beethoven, for instance.  I think your logic is seriously flawed; using Chopin as a defense to my argument is quite weak because not only did he write well for only one instrument, it is generally agreed that his attempts at writing for other instruments, especially orchestras, were failures.  There is no way his piano concertos would exist in the repertory today if it weren't for the brilliance of the piano part, because frankly I could orchestrate them better than he did. 

Is your thinking always this cloudy, or is it because you've been sitting at the computer for the past three and a half hours?

[lenny]

Lenny, I am extremely picky about the word "revolutionary."  Chopin may have had a substantial influence on the romantic era, but his "revolutionzation" was easily dwarfed by that of Beethoven, for instance.  I think your logic is seriously flawed; using Chopin as a defense to my argument is quite weak because not only did he write well for only one instrument, it is generally agreed that his attempts at writing for other instruments, especially orchestras, were failures.  There is no way his piano concertos would exist in the repertory today if it weren't for the brilliance of the piano part, because frankly I could orchestrate them better than he did. 

Is your thinking always this cloudy, or is it because you've been sitting at the computer for the past three and a half hours?

theres a difference between badly orchestrated music and badly composed music

one could say the same thing about schubert's piano works, they dont exactly use the pianos capabilities very well and are awkward, but does that stop them being great music? no!

i am just saying that orchestration and 'piano writing' are more superficial elements in musical composition

[musik_man]

I'll go ahead and make my top 5 list.  To make up for that, I'll explain my choices.

1)Beethoven-This one is by a wide margin.  He not only composed a great amount of material, but most of it's of high quality.  Not to mention that he's a huge figure in the development of music.  The 9th Symphony, alone, influenced more music than many other composers did with all of their works.  Most importantly he wrote great music.  The 5th, 6th, 7th, and 9th Symphonies, the Kreutzer Sonata, the 3rd and 5th Cello Sonatas, the Waldstein, Pathetique, op 101, op111, etc...

2)Mozart-He seems to be somewhat unpopular in this forum, but I love him, even his happy stuff (there's a place in music for happiness.)  His Opera's are the best I've ever heard.  If he'd have lived longer, he might have even been #1.

3)Mahler-This one might surprise some people, but I can defend my decision to stick him here based off of one work, the Resurection Symphony.  That may be my favorite piece ever written.  His symphonies represent the peak of Romanticism, and his Lieder are incredibly moving.

4)Bach-He seems to be nearly worshiped at this forum, but I disagree.  Many of his religuous works and heavily contrapuntal works are kinda boring.  However, in works like the Goldberg Variations, Violin Concertos, Brandenburg Concertos, and Italian concerto he writes brilliantly.  Also he wasn't paticularly revolutionary.  When he composed, he was falling behind the times musically. *puts on flame-retardant vest*

5)Mendelssohn-He represents the perfect balance of Classicism and Romanticism.  The G minor Piano Concerto and the E minor Violin Concerto, are both contenders for the best in their genres.

[lenny]

oh yeah, i noticed mahler is at no17, he should be above mozart IMO, i just bought a DVD of the 2nd symphony as you mentioned, i skipped right to the end, and just that part alone moved me so much.

it really HITS YOU physically, i was just left sittin still in shock and awe.

[willcowskitz]

I haven't even heard all of them but I'm still pretty sure some of them could be knocked out by Rachmaninow and Zipoli (though he died at 38 and didn't produce much music). Some composers create music very methodically and routinely by expanding simple ideas into complex structures that are beautiful because they follow the rules of musical aesthetics - others just fly and create beauty. Zipoli was one of those. Oh yeah... Where's Dupré?

[DarkWind]

That's fantastic, but he's not Top 15 material, in my view.  Anybody who composes (efficiently) for only one instrument, regardless of how much he "revolutionized" it, and despite how great of a performer, transcriber, and one-instrument composer he was, does not get very far in my book.  Don't get me wrong: Liszt composed some of my favorite piano works, but much of his orchestral works couldn't hold a candle to what he composed for the instrument about which he was most passionate. 

Of course, it's all subjective and whatnot.  Personal opinion. 

Are you kidding? Liszt's Symphonic Poems are incredible, the orchestras he uses aren't very large, but he can draw a giant amount of sound from them. I find his orchestral works to be much better than hundreds of other composers who wrote for lots of different instruments. On top of that, he made the Symphonic poem form, which allowed Strauss, Sibelius, and many others, to write their magnificent tone poems. Liszt seriously had a heavy influence on the music ahead of him, and he deeply influenced Wagner. And, to influence Wagner is not just any small thing. By the end of the 19th century, your were either a Wagnerist or an Anti-Wagnerist, there was almost virtually no middle ground. His gigantic operas influencing even the smallest nuances of music after him.

Oh well, if anything, I guess I'm talking more about the 50 most important composers.

[musicsdarkangel]

1.Rachmaninoff
2.Chopin
3.Liszt
4.Ravel
5.Barber
6.Beethoven
7.Dvorak
8.Mendelssohn
9.Beethoven
10.Mahler
11.Brahms
12.Bach
13.Franck
14.Tchaikovsky
15.Mozart
16.Schubert
17.Prokofiev
18.Shostakovich
19.Strauss
20.Debussy
21.Faure

[DarkWind]

oh yeah, i noticed mahler is at no17, he should be above mozart IMO, i just bought a DVD of the 2nd symphony as you mentioned, i skipped right to the end, and just that part alone moved me so much.

it really HITS YOU physically, i was just left sittin still in shock and awe.

Yeah, Mahler is an awesome composer. I'd also recommend Das Lied von der Erde and the Symphonies 6-8. They are powerful and beautiful. Also, listen to the third and first movements of the Resurrection Symphony, they are amazing too. I like that symphony, but it only broke the ice for Mahler, and allowed him to become recognized as a conductor. His magnum opus is easily the 8th Symphony.

[aquariuswb]

1.Rachmaninoff
2.Chopin
3.Liszt
4.Ravel
5.Barber
6.Beethoven
7.Dvorak
8.Mendelssohn
9.Beethoven
10.Mahler
11.Brahms
12.Bach
13.Franck
14.Tchaikovsky
15.Mozart
16.Schubert
17.Prokofiev
18.Shostakovich
19.Strauss
20.Debussy
21.Faure

You listed Beethoven twice, which makes up for the fact that he's not in your top 5!

[steinwayguy]

If we're talking about influence to music, shouldn't Beethoven be at least 2nd? And shouldn't Monteverdi be waaaaaaaaaaay up from 33 or so? Also, Brahms is a better composer than Wagner. And Rachmaninoff nowhere on the list? what?

[Rockitman]

Where the hell is Gershwin?

[Pianostudy]

Where the hell is Gershwin?

Yeah.. where the hell IS Gershwin??

[anda]

to all of you who say "mozart should be way lower in the list": without mozart, all music written after him wouldn't be the same - think of this!

[apion]

Yeah: HAYDN :-)

Haydn is #21.

[apion]

liszt was more innovative than wagner, yes

but wagner was a profound musical genius, liszt never wrote anything of his scale

Wagner was the most influential musician/composer of all time.

[Hamfast]

Yeah.. where the hell IS Gershwin??

Where the hell is Bartok, Berlioz, Wieniawski, Glazunow?

[lenny]

Wagner was the most influential musician/composer of all time.

where do you get that from?

liszt influenced wagner more than anyone

[apion]

where do you get that from?

liszt influenced wagner more than anyone

Huh?  Wagner influenced Liszt.

[Hamfast]

Huh?  Wagner influenced Liszt.

No, no, no, Liszt influenced Wagner's music, but Wagner influenced liszt's behaviour.