I propose that Shostakovich was the most superior modern composer.

[DainBramaged]

His two piano concertos are outstanding; the second movement from the second concerto is a remarkably touching piece. His jazz suites are superb. His prolific output of symphonies produced many compelling moments (I love No. 7), his string quartets are unrivaled, and his piano trios are almost haunting. Anyone care to contest this proposal?

 

[preslove]

I prefer bartok. Schoenberg is good, too. For jazz I turn to jazz composers, like Charles Mingus.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Some of his symphonies were somewhat mediocre, plus you're passing over Bartok, Rachmaninoff, Ives, Gershwin, Copland, Mahler and others. You're going to need better support than that

 

[DainBramaged]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Some of his symphonies were somewhat mediocre, plus you're passing over Bartok, Rachmaninoff, Ives, Gershwin, Copland, Mahler and others. You're going to need better support than that

Rachmaninoff is really more late Romantic and even more so with Mahler. Rachmaninoff > Shostakovich. Ives, Gershwin, Copland = suck.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: DainBramaged

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Some of his symphonies were somewhat mediocre, plus you're passing over Bartok, Rachmaninoff, Ives, Gershwin, Copland, Mahler and others. You're going to need better support than that

Rachmaninoff is really more late Romantic and even more so with Mahler. Rachmaninoff > Shostakovich. Ives, Gershwin, Copland, = such.

Mahler is a post romantic composer, so I'm not quite sure of your definition of modern, though I suppose rach is a really late romantic one.

and what about the latter 3?

 

[DainBramaged]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother

Originally posted by: DainBramaged

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Some of his symphonies were somewhat mediocre, plus you're passing over Bartok, Rachmaninoff, Ives, Gershwin, Copland, Mahler and others. You're going to need better support than that

Rachmaninoff is really more late Romantic and even more so with Mahler. Rachmaninoff > Shostakovich. Ives, Gershwin, Copland, = such.

Mahler is a post romantic composer, so I'm not quite sure of your definition of modern, though I suppose rach is a really late romantic one.

and what about the latter 3?

I'm just not a fan. I retract what I said about them sucking, but they didn't write the music that attracts me. Thus, in my book anyway, Shostakovich is far superior.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: DainBramaged

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother

Originally posted by: DainBramaged

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Some of his symphonies were somewhat mediocre, plus you're passing over Bartok, Rachmaninoff, Ives, Gershwin, Copland, Mahler and others. You're going to need better support than that

Rachmaninoff is really more late Romantic and even more so with Mahler. Rachmaninoff > Shostakovich. Ives, Gershwin, Copland, = such.

Mahler is a post romantic composer, so I'm not quite sure of your definition of modern, though I suppose rach is a really late romantic one.

and what about the latter 3?

I'm just not a fan. I retract what I said about them sucking, but they didn't write the music that attracts me. Thus, in my book anyway, Shostakovich is far superior.

maybe, so your definition of superior sucks, or just your taste

Ives really influenced the later composers with his revolutionary dissonances and such, mahler is great. Of course, I love shostakovich, played his cello concerto 1, but I'm just poking at your hubris in declaring Shostakovich as superior

 

[esun]

I think Shostakovich is good, but the best? Hard to say. There were lots of good Russian composers in the 20th century. Let's not forget Prokofiev and Stravinsky.

 

[DainBramaged]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother

Originally posted by: DainBramaged

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother

Originally posted by: DainBramaged

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Some of his symphonies were somewhat mediocre, plus you're passing over Bartok, Rachmaninoff, Ives, Gershwin, Copland, Mahler and others. You're going to need better support than that

Rachmaninoff is really more late Romantic and even more so with Mahler. Rachmaninoff > Shostakovich. Ives, Gershwin, Copland, = such.

Mahler is a post romantic composer, so I'm not quite sure of your definition of modern, though I suppose rach is a really late romantic one.

and what about the latter 3?

I'm just not a fan. I retract what I said about them sucking, but they didn't write the music that attracts me. Thus, in my book anyway, Shostakovich is far superior.

maybe, so your definition of superior sucks, or just your taste

Ives really influenced the later composers with his revolutionary dissonances and such, mahler is great. Of course, I love shostakovich, played his cello concerto 1, but I'm just poking at your hubris in declaring Shostakovich as superior

What can I say? There is clearly no superior than the man himself.

 

[preslove]

Screw Shostakovich.

I'll take a little Schoenberg and a little Bartok, thank you very much.

 

[ethebubbeth]

I'm pleased to see references to Schoenberg in this thread... he is not well known and is often glossed over.

I love a lot of Shostakovich's catalog, but some of his symphonies are mediocre.

Personally, I prefer meatier compositions like those of Mahler, Wagner, Brookner, etcetera.

I also love the just plain crazyness of Stravinsky

 

[j511180]

I don't understand twentieth century music. I guess it's for the more academic types. Is Shostakovich considered atonal? What about Debussy? I've heard one Schoenberg piece and my initial thought was "WTF? It's a bunch of wrong notes." It was disorienting.

carry on....

 

[preslove]

Originally posted by: ethebubbeth
I'm pleased to see references to Schoenberg in this thread... he is not well known and is often glossed over.

I love a lot of Shostakovich's catalog, but some of his symphonies are mediocre.

Personally, I prefer meatier compositions like those of Mahler, Wagner, Brookner, etcetera.

I also love the just plain crazyness of Stravinsky

Verklarte Nacht (Transfigured Night) is my favorite orchestral piece, ever. It's 30 minutes of full on intense awesomeness.

 

[ethebubbeth]

Originally posted by: preslove
Verklarte Nacht (Transfigured Night) is my favorite orchestral piece, ever. It's 3 minutes of full on intense awesomeness.

It's not my favorite, but I acknowledge its awesomeness :shocked:

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: j511180
I don't understand twentieth century music. I guess it's for the more academic types. Is Shostakovich considered atonal? What about Debussy? I've heard one Schoenberg piece and my initial thought was "WTF? It's a bunch of wrong notes." It was disorienting.

carry on....

google dissonance

 

[Rogodin2]

Bartok's 32nd is amazing! I can listen to it over and over again and it still makes my hair stand on end.

Shostakovic is amazing, though I don't own any of his work-I hear it on NPR ever other week.

Rogo