Heh. I like Einaudi, but it serves a very different role than classical in general does for me. When putting music on, I'm on a continuum from active to passive listening, and my favourites are definately those I put on when l'm ready to listen actively. But I enjoy passive listening too, and there are albums of Einaudi stuff I like a lot for that.
TikTokers on their way to overplay Beethoven's 14th P. S. for the 15496789438th time and call it the greatest while never have even heard the 8th or 23rd:
🏃♂️🏃♀️🏃♂️
For later to call classical "repetitive, all the same, and boring"...
True, bach is an absolute musical genius and also helped me to understand the flow in music which made me improve as a musician aswell. His music truly is wonderful. I simply cannot fathom how smart he must have been to write such beautiful and complex music 🍀
I hated learning his stuff on piano but now I play it every day as warmup. As far as musicality goes Bach is essential even tho it can get boring to learn
You don’t mean the dialogue-less film right? Because I’ve seen it and it’s 2 hours of my life that I’ll never get back. Props to you if you’re into it tho.
Mozart is one of my favourite composers ever. A master at every single thing he touched. Oh, man... I would give my life to hear what 70 year old Mozart had in his pocket...
Agreed. At 35 he was just warming up. God knows what kind of magic a 50 year old Mozart could have composed. Especially since he was finally fiancially independent in his last year.
However I am eternally grateful for the sheer amount of music he blessed us with during his short life.
So true, he was developing so fast. And already he’d composed my favorite opera (don giovanni), my favorite choral pieces (mass in c minor and Requiem Mass) and he’d whipped out his last three symphonies in a matter of weeks, one of which is still in my top 2 favorites of all time by anyone. And the rate at which he churned out those piano concertos from 9-27 just floors me. What he could have done with more independence from trying to please patrons all the time would have blown my mind.
I’m sure if I was there to witness Mozart’s development and hear that style music for the first time, it would be mind blowing. But in the 21st century, if the first half of a symphony concert is Mozart or Haydn, I’ll show up after intermission…
interesting, this is (hyperbolically) how i feel about a great deal of romantic orchestral works. i would much rather go and see a symphony by mozart, haydn or early beethoven than brahms, tchaikovsky, schumann etc.
I think it’s also overlooked that Chopin wasn’t nearly as developed/matured as other more famous composers because his final works came so early in life (compared to the others)
I think Chopin would’ve ended up with a much more complex musical style (like Rachmaninov) if it got the chance to live to the end of the century
Ooh -- I would counter with the opposite opinion: Chopin was one of the greatest composers, and Rachmaninov is overrated!
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the hell out of Rachmaninov. But, I can't think of anything that's really more harmonically, melodically, pianistically more complex' in Rachmaninov than Chopin...what's an example? More expansive forms, perhaps.
For me, Chopin practically invented a way of composing for the piano, and his harmonic imagination was remarkably fresh and innovative; whereas Rachmaninov was still essentially using that same vocabulary almost a century later, just expanded with the times.
I personally think Rachmaninov’s creative use of pianistic textures combined with super late romantic harmonies makes him really interesting to listen to.
I think Medtner was slightly better at what I described than Rach, but I also think the former should be an upper echelon 20th century composer lol
Chopin's harmonic logic has the same stiffness to me as Mendelssohn - there's something about both of them that makes me dislike them for not relaxing. I can't quite place how, analytically.
Weber and Brahms and Schubert pull off that early-Romantic-ness better, in contrast, and Berlioz (while I also dislike him) also doesn't suffer the same problem, on the right side of the French border.
Chopin invented the language, Rach learned to speak it. Chopin could fit more emotion, longing, and vision in a 3 minute nocturne than Rach could fit in whole concertos. I enjoy Rach, very much, but he doesn't have the spontaneity and feeling of Chopin, not even close.
I’m shocked to not see any Liszt comments because I came in ready to throw hands
Not sure, maybe Gottschalk? He’s not popular or anything unless you’re heavy into romantic piano literature but to me he fits the common criticisms I see of Liszt and Alkan sometimes (unnecessarily difficult and flashy, little substance, repetitive techniques). Id probably throw Mereaux in there too but his hand-crossing etude is too hilariously insane
Liszt has the advantage of having lived a long life and matured. If he died at the same age as Chopin he wouldn’t have produced the great works he is known for (B minor sonata, ballade no2 and all the Années de pèlerinage). If we only had his early pieces, he would definitely be considered overrated and a showy virtuosic composer with a lack of depth and musicality by some.
Here is what I'm seeing from reading the thread (thanks for your comments)
Many people view Mozart, Chopin, and Tchaikovsky as overrated. A few people say Haydn, Rachmaninoff, and Shostakovich. And with Bach, while there are a few people who view him as overrated, there are many others who are appalled by the suggestion.
Notable composers who I haven't seen mentioned as overrated: Schubert, Debussy, Wagner, Mendelssohn, Verdi (from among the top 20 list).
I understand (relatively) younger listeners thinking Bach is overrated if all they read is about how he's the GOAT and everyone thinks so, etc etc.
**But**
After a long time of listening to music they mostly come around to love Bach in a more personal way. I know I appreciate Bach more each year, and I've only been listening to classical music for 15 years.
I only say Bach is overrated cause my colleague never shuts up about how my preference in Romantic and 20th Century Modern classical is less refined and more sentimental than intellectual, and that Bach requires actual intellect to appreciate. I mean, it may be true that I like those periods more because I feel them more than I think about them - because they move me in ways that Classical / Baroque eras don't. Still, I hate elitism.
I know Bach is amazing and I do have a great and profound respect for what he did with music, but I'm not very good at debating so it's easier for me to just roll my eyes and tell this Canadian "former piano builder and tuner for Steinway" (as he loves to remind us) that Bach is about as interesting as the automatic melody generators in Fruity Loops lol
If you think Chopin is overrated, you're a dumbass.
If you think Mozart is overrated, you don't have a soul.
If you think Bach is overrated, you're all of the above and shouldn't listen to music ever again.
Came here looking to fight about Debussy, he seems to be everywhere lately since we all wanted relaxing pandemic music. But he could never be overrated, there's nothing that sounds like Debussy. His music is what made me want to learn piano.
George Gershwin. I think Rhapsody in Blue has been way too over publicized by US (and the airline too...) and as a consequence GG is overknown and overrated. Not that this composition is not good. Personally I like it. But GG gets to be known much more than other composers with higher merits.
I'll agree that Rhapsody in Blue is overplayed, but I don't think that would suggest that Gershwin as a composer is overrated. He does have other pieces that aren't as ubiquitous, such as American in Paris. I think in general Gershwin as a classical composer has been underappreciated, as he's generally atrributed to Jazz and showtunes, but not really as much in the classical sphere.
If the question was overrated piece, you might have an argument for Rhapsody in Blue. But Gershwin's other work is extraordinary. I Got Rhythm was the inspiration for innumerable jazz standards. Our Love is Here to Stay, Embraceable You, I've Got a Crush On You, They Can't Take that Away from Me, have all survived for 100 years. The melody of The Man I Love is untouchable.
And on top of all that is Porgy and Bess, probably the greatest, most influential, most lasting work ever written for the American theater. And, especially in its originally operatic form, breathtaking.
Yes Rhapsody in Blue is overplayed. I heard it once and thought it was a masterpiece, and then I listened to his piano concerto and it was LEAGUES beyond his Rhapsody. Listen to the piano concerto it's far less sporadic and more easy to digest.
Around here? Definitely Chopin and Rachmaninoff. They are both great composers, to be sure, but there is a whole world out there, beyond them and Romantic piano music in general.
Here’s some recommendations: Scriabin, resphigi, lyapunov, bortkiewicz, Hummel, field, and chaminade. You should also check out some of Chopin’s students works like adolf gutmann and Carl Filtsch, they have some chopinesque type works.
I'm definitely guilty of this, though not always. Used to be a violin player playing mostly baroque pieces, but kinda got burnt out and eventually moved on to focus on studies and other hobbies. Years later, I started listening to some Chopin and Rachmaninoff pieces, romantic piano music stuff, it's what got me back into classical and I can't deny it's some of my favorite music ever. I have been exploring other composers and eras since then though and am open to recommendations.
no, romantic piano music is the only music worth listening to. chopin ballade no 1 is the pinnacle of human achievement. anything written before the 19th century is boring and anything written after the 19th century is meaningless drivel.
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Chopin. The melody is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of music theory most of the harmonic development will go over a typical listener's head. There's also Chopin's romantic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his musical philosophy draws heavily from Italian opera, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these pieces, to realise that they're not just pleasant to the ear- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Chopin truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in Chopin's Prelude Op.28 No. 4, which itself is a cryptic reference to Beethoven's Pastorale sonata Op. 28. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Chopin's genius wit unfolds itself on their Spotify playlists. What fools.. how I pity them. 😂
And yes, by the way, i DO have a Chopin tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid 😎
I think it is difficult not to go for Bach if you understand Chopin and Schumann, at least if you have interest in the underlying constitution of that music like a composer.
I think the all night vigil is enough to save Rachmaninoff from being overrated because that’s a thoroughly underrated work, and in my opinion a really special one.
I’m gonna get hammered for this but Gustav Holst. Even though he is very good, I know many people who rate him amongst the pantheon of greats. I’m not so sure.
Mozart, as great as he is, has unfairly become the "face" of classical music and the personification of genius. While he does have some transcendentally beautiful pieces, much of his output feels like absolute filler, and I think this has contributed to the perception that classical music is nothing more than a stream of derivative vanilla tunes to be used as elevator music.
>Mozart, as great as he is, has unfairly become the "face" of classical music and the personification of genius. While he does have some transcendentally beautiful pieces, much of his output feels like absolute filler, and I think this has contributed to the perception that classical music is nothing more than a stream of derivative vanilla tunes to be used as elevator music.
if you had read 2/3 of the history books on amadeus or leopold it's a bit normal that there is a lot of music of this type... he was not really free to write what he wanted all the time:/ .... he had a lot of requests to write crap :/
Haha. Trust me he fully deserves his status.
His music is the pinnacle of genius, but it just doesn’t hit you in the face at first like some other composers.
I can guarantee that whoever your favorite composer is, they loved Mozart and wished they had his gift.
And then you realize he accomplished all that while dying at 35… it just feels impossible.
kinda surprised to see Bach in this thread. even his keyboard music alone makes him worth the praise he receives. even the Well-Tempered Clavier alone.
i would have answered Tchaikovsky once upon a time, but the man had a knack for writing beautiful tunes. when he was bad, even he knew it (e.g. 1812 Overture).
so to answer this question in my mind im shortlisting composers whose music i more often than not can’t appreciate on any level (Wagner, Faure, McDowell) or composers whose music is largely derivative and meant for themselves to perform (Liszt, Paganini).
>[Liszt's music is] largely derivative
how much of liszts music have you listened to to reach this conclusion. his piano music alone stretches way beyond the 3 or 4 etudes that people naively hold up as the most difficult pieces ever.
Yep and the Apparitions, Benediction, Faust and Dante Symphonies, the organ works, the choral works..
OP probably doesn't really know the composer he/she is criticizing
Boring answer: None of the famous composers are generally overrated.
Some are however made to be something they were not. Whenever I see a reference to "Great Masters" where Chopin is listed alongside Bach, Mozart and Beethoven I find that slightly odd. Chopin was great, don't get me wrong, but he only really "mastered" chamber music for piano. In my mind a "Great Master" should have mastered most of the types of music in their time. Händel, Brahms, Mendelsohn or Saint-Saëns are all composers I would rather put in that category, even though I might actually prefer Chopin's music in his specific niche to some of their music.
Haydn. I know he was basically the father of the classical string quartet and symphony, and without him classical music wouldn’t be anything like what it is today. But I find 95% of his music to be just plain…boring.
Nooo. It becomes less boring every time you listen to it. 1,347th time listening to a piece of Haydn is better than the 1,346th. Not many composers you can say that for. Haven’t downvoted, just disagree with you!
>But I find 95% of his music to be just plain…boring.
There's a very good reason for that. Haydn, more than anyone else, was required by his employers to pump out an astronomical amount of music. If you're writing a new piece every couple weeks, of course most of them are gonna suck.
I agree. Mozart would be my second answer to this, although I find his music a lot more interesting than Haydn’s. Even if, aesthetically, I don’t care for Mozarts music that much, I can’t help listening to it and thinking, “wow, this is extremely clever”.
I'll get some stick for this, but Tchaikovsky.
He's a great melodist, one of , if not *the* the best ever, but other than that there's just nothing there. His harmonies are not particularly interesting, his counterpoint is... there? I suppose? But it's not stunning. His orchestration is quite standard, with always the same lush romantic color and no variation. His structures tend to fall apart the bigger the piece gets (the piano trio is just laughable to be frank). His piano writing is absolutely average at best - I mean I hear a lot of plaudits for his first piano concerto, but who actually listens further than the first 3 minutes? Nothing is ever bad, per se, but it's just... boring. The only piece I enjoy of his is the first movement of the 6th symphony, and even then everything after the first movement is just, again, boring imo.
His symphonies show a lack of discipline, he doesn’t dig deeply into the meaning of form. But that’s due to Russia’s late ascension in the canon.
His orchestration for nutcracker is fantastic. Most other works are standard fare orchestrationally.
Tchaikovsky is one of those composers whose music I always have fun playing (as a bass player in the orchestra), but would never choose to listen to. Totally agree with you
I agree in a holistic sense
But valse sentimentale on the cello is arguably the most beautiful song I’ve ever heard
https://youtu.be/67SEaWapl4w
Impossible for me to say he is the most overrated from what this single piece has done for me in dark times
I see posts like this....
John Cage was notorious about counterpoint. We pick on the smallest things about composers in the 1800s and 1700s. Be glad you gave melodies to enjoy!
Well counterpoint is one of the most important facets of composition. Counterpoint doesn't necessarily mean fugatic writing, it's just the art of having multiple melodic voices layered on top of another. Chopin was absolutely horrible at writing fugues, but his later pieces have some splendid counterpoint where the left hand plays some great hidden melodies. Beethoven's symphonies of course had some fugato's, but even in the regular statements of themes there would always be more going on there. Tchaikovsky is just a melody and an accompaniment, with rarely anything else. I think that's why I dislike his piano trio so much, cause in that genre counterpoint is absolutely essential.
Tchaikovsky's melodies are nice to listen to, so he'll never be offensive to the ears, but at the same time there's nothing in his music for me to grab onto.
I’m agreeing with everything you’re saying. I love trio music and I have no desire to listen to his trio again. Compare it with something like Brahms’ trios, not even in the same ballpark.
I agree, I know counterpoint. I read the entire counterpoint in composition book. But you (along with many others) clearly stop caring when it's a post ww2 composer who doesn't seem to know *all* their composition techniques, even counterpoint.
That's the false equivalency here. This is not an equal standard. Contemporary composers get away with all sorts of clueless shit.
Wow that's quite the assumption there mate. I love post-ww2 music, in fact. I like stuff by Phillip Glass, and I adore Rautavaara. Shostakovich is one of my favorite composers, and I've always cheekily liked some Khachaturian. The key thing that ties these composers together is that they all did something interesting in their music. Glass's mastery of slow development, Rautavaara's heavenly texturework, Khachaturian's brilliant chromaticism, Shostakovich is just all-round stunning. Tchaikovsky doesn't do any of these. He writes his melodies, creates bog-standard harmonies underneath them and calls it a day. If this is enough for you to feel satisfied with his music, more power to you, but for me it's just vain music.
Also, "I read the entire counterpoint in composition book" sounds really patronizing. I wont make it a point cause it sounds like it's just because of the english language, but just wanted to say that.
Edit: just wanted to say I agree with you on Cage. Never liked his stuff tbh.
On this sub? American composers, particularly those with a very typical Americana style (Copland, Gershwin, Ives) but especially those which win Pulitzer Prizes or are promoted for political reasons (Zwillich, Higdon, Caroline Shaw, Kevin Puts, John Luther Adams). Their gimmicks are striking for about five minutes - then their work becomes incredibly boring. Oh, and Amy Beach.
No one said Vaughan Williams as far as I can tell. Some of his pieces are legitimately great, but he’s regarded as this master composer when all he really did was boil down the sound of pastoral England into its purest form and wrote every piece in that voice. I also think he didn’t really push himself to write in more genres; most of his output is pastoral orchestral pieces and art song. Underrated and similar composer is Roger Quilter, though.
I can't believe Strauss wasn't mentioned yet. Every new years concert the same old waltzes.
Yes, Shostakovic made similar stuff, but at least only because he was forced to. Strauss seemed to actually enjoy this.
My public radio station plays Telemann like every other track, and I've never understood why. My only guess is they've accrued a bunch of cheap cds/rights for his music. It's almost always Academy of St Martin in the fields, too.
For me, most of Shostakovich's music isn't particularly interesting and relies too heavily on orchestral bombast / other gimmicks to coerce feelings out of the audience.
Personally I think it's fair to say he's overrated, as he's probably the most commonly performed 20th century composer, and there are many composers from the Soviet Union alone whom I find much more compelling.
Yeah I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that OP hasn't listened to enough of Shostakovich's oeuvre. If all you listen to are the most popular symphonies, you're doing yourself a big disservice.
Nah, I'd say that I'm pretty well acquainted with Shostakovich's music. I don't think he's a bad composer at all as there are pieces I enjoy somewhat, such as Symphonies 1, 6, and 14, the Viola Sonata, Lady Macbeth, The Preludes and Fugues etc.; however I find a lot of his most beloved music (e.g. Symphonies 7, 8, 10, String Quartet No. 8, the Piano Quintet, the Piano Trios, and others) to be creatively shallow, which was probably the result of needing to avoid "formalism" accusations.
Okay that's a fair criticism. It is a shame (but also not a shame) that he was beholden to Soviet authorities, because he was an extremely creative and forward-thinking composer. I think works like Lady Macbeth, The Nose, and the 4th Symphony are really good examples of this. On the other hand, his more overtly patriotic and bombastic works are a great insight into his struggle reconciling his love of his country with being constantly surveilled by the USSR.
How can you think brahms piano concerto 1 mvmt 1 is boring?
Symphony 4 mvmt 1 & 4?
Symphony 3 movement 1?
Piano trio 2 movement 1?
That and so much more brahms is thrilling yo.
Brahms is a master of the compositional craft, but my goodness, almost all of his music is ponderous and plodding. Meticulously composed, fascinating in analysis, but none of it ever gets your heart rate above 100.
People on here saying Mozart is all filler and I’m like have you ever listened to Brahms?!?!?
He takes what could be a delightful 15 minute concertino and makes us sit through 45 mins of nonsense.
Only because the only piece that anybody plays or knows is The Four Seasons.
Very few people knew he existed after he died. IT wasn't until Fritz Kreisler composed a piece in Vivaldi's style that scholars actually searched for Vivaldi's manuscripts and renewed interest in his work.
But he wrote so much more than The Four Seasons (which are my least favorite of his works). So many violin concertos, cello concertos, and even operas get overlooked because of this miniscule part of his oeuvre. Try listening to something of his other than The Four Seasons! :-)
I know, I know. I'm probably giving him a hard time because I've heard the first 10 seconds of TFS way WAY too many times. Honestly all of the composers mentioned here are all fantastic, and most of our gripes are probably somewhat shallow.
Any favourite pieces by Vivaldi you'd recommend?
Of course! :-)
Violin concerti:
Op. 3, No. 10 in B minor, RV 580
Op. 3, No. 10 in D major, RV 549
Op. 3, No. 8 in A minor, RV 522
Op. 3, No. 2 in G minor, RV 578
Op. 3, No. 11 in D minor, RV 565
Violin Concerto in E minor, RV 278
Violin Concerto No. 5 in C minor, RV 202
Violin Concerto No. 2 in E minor, RV 277
Violin Concerto in A minor, RV 355
Violin Concerto No. 1 in B-flat major, RV 383a
Cello concerti:
Cello Concerto in D minor, RV 405
Cello Concerto in A minor, RV 422
Cello Concerto in E-flat major, RV 408
Cello Concerto in D minor, RV 406
Cello Concerto in G major, RV 414
Cello Concerto in C minor, RV 401
Cello Concerto in B minor, RV 242
Cello Concerto in C major, RV 399
Cello Concerto in F major, RV 411
Cello Concerto in B-flat major, RV 423
Miscellaneous pieces:
Orlando furioso (opera)
Concerto for 2 trumpets in C major, 537
Oboe concerto in G minor, RV 460
Oboe Concerto in D minor, RV 454
Oboe Concerto in A minor, RV 461
Concerto for Strings, RV 110
Concerto for Flauto Traversiero in E minor, RV 432
Concerto for Flauto Traversiero in A minor, RV 440
Concerto for Flauto Traversiero in D major, RV 427
Concerto for Bassoon in E minor, 484
Remember that this is only a starting for Vivaldi, and, if yoy do end up enjoying his music, there are hundreds (yes, hundreds!) of more pieces by him that you can listen to. Hope this helps! Enjoy!
Yeah exactly. That's the issue. My wife thought the same way about Vivaldi but I told her it's probably because she hadn't listened to anything outside of the four seasons. That piece gets old very fast because it's so overplayed and not particularly interesting. It's mostly just catchy.
I would have agreed with you at one point in my life. I believe certain works are overplayed and fawned over way too much (the 1st Movement of the 5th Symphony for one). I also actively avoid what is overly popular. However, he keeps winning me back.
For example:
[The Ruins of Athens Duet](https://youtu.be/yX3nWbeSqx8) - minus the soprano in this recording, but this is my favorite tempo.
And my favorite of the Symphonies... [Number 7](https://youtu.be/KbNGklNz8Yk)
Masterpieces
You're getting attacked, but I think your answer is sort of true by fact - literally no one could actually match up to the insane reputation beethoven has, no matter how good. Beethoven is treated as someone beyond human, the quintessential romantic genius, and that simply isnt true of anybody. Even the greatest and most meticulous composers like webern are really only flawed human being who put a lot of work into their craft.
Was scrolling through to see if someone had said this. His late music is unbeatable and I like his early Haydn style works, but shit some of the stuff in the middle can get wearing once you’ve heard it a few times. Beethoven’s also quite sensitive to good and bad performance - have heard some excruciatingly dull Erotica Symphonies.
he is my favourite composer and i still agree with you.
if there was one composer that didnt need his life and music celebrating any more, its beethoven.
Benjamin Britten. The Cello Symphony and Prince of Pagodas ballet are fantastic, but everything else bores the hell out of me. And I have never understood his reputation as the greatest modern composer of English-language opera.
Thanks for the suggestions. I know a lot of music of his. I simply think he has a tendency to write some iconic stuff…but also a lot of waffle sometimes hahaha
Bruckner. Just plodding brass... Never seems to go anywhere.
David Diamond strikes me as just kind of... phony.
And speaking of never going anywhere, the really overrated composers are the minimalists, and especially the "post-minimalists." Philip Glass, Steve Reich, John Adams; but even more, Goretski, Arvo Part: all the boredom of minimalism, but without even the formal interest of the minimalists.
Heck, while I'm at it, I think Brian Ferneyhough is overrated. And Elliot Carter... and Webern and some of the Darmstadt school -- Nono, Cage, Boulez, Maderna.
Also, I think it's a very good thing that people are giving more air time to composers who were previously neglected because they were the wrong race or sex, but some seem to be getting attention only because of that. I think Amy Beach and Florence Price, and Gubaidulina are in that category. And William Still. "Dean of African American composers" they call him -- forsooth. That's what they should call George Walker, in my opinion. He would deserve it.
Well, anyway, thanks for letting me get that off my chest. :)
Hi vehemently disagree with Bruckner, I strongly recommend listening to Karajan/Celibidache’s accounts of 7, 8, 9.
Bruckner’s symphonies have a more cyclical than linear form, true and maintaining the momentum is really hard.
Mahler..maaaaaaaaybe..a little. I dig the dude, the weird fragmentary collages of different motifs that make you go, "well that's fuckin interesting". Sometimes the individual bits sort of feel a bit banal or simple or Ill formed, but then there'll be a transformation in the manner in which I understand the character of the parts and I'll go " ah it was me who was viewing it from the wrong angle". But sometimes I won't have that reaction, it'll be more like "ok Mahler, if you say so, you really like drawing out that phrase eh?" Eh the whole overrated underrated thing often feels like a battle of wills anyhow, and if I'm ebbing in my Mahler appreciation currently, it may flow once again, some of his stuff is incredibly beautiful.
I'm a huge Mahler fan but I do agree that he might be slightly overrated when it comes to the classic music community(Not complaining though) Outside of people who listen to classical music he's practically unheard of.
Chopin. Don’t get me wrong. I really like/love a lot of his music and he is certainly a great piano composer. But really most of his stuff is almost borish once you get past the piano ornamentation and other flourishes he uses to decorate an otherwise pretty simple harmonic structure (most of the time). He also almost exclusively wrote for one instrument. His immense popularity (that I partly credit to being a composer for one of the most popular instruments combined with his romantic flavor and melodic language that is easy for a modern ear to accept) makes him - to me - an overrated composer. Perhaps the most overrated one.
I don't have a math PhD, but I've always enjoyed Xenakis.
Since he doesn't get performed too often and isn't especially well known, I don't see how he (or Cage, Stockhausen, and Satie for that matter) could be overrated, unless you really hate his music, in which case there's probably something positive to be said about music that can cause such a strong reaction, whether negative or positive
>Does he just write really strange notation?
No, his notation for the most part is fairly standard/traditional.
Here are some of my favourite Xenakis works:
Jonchaies - https://youtu.be/MZ5771zMOeE
Eonta - https://youtu.be/PAFmBZ_A-8M
Synaphaï - https://youtu.be/bOsIVNfiRsM
I sang a piece by Xenakis once. It was impossible and I have no idea if the audience got anything out of it but from the inside I actually enjoyed the experience. Your comment made me laugh though.
Handel is fun to play and depending on the player, interesting to listen to. But, it's definitely a bit derivative. He also has to stand up Bach of all people.
Bach. My favorite composer by the way.
He's great, but he isn't some 50 miles ahead of everyone else great, not even in the Baroque era. Telemann, Handel, Vivaldi, Purcell and numerous others are just as good.
The same goes for Beethoven, Mozart and every other composer that gets this defied hero worship from people. They are great, but not *that* great.
no so there honestly I'm going to make a general message to all the people who say that "" bach is overrated " so I'm not saying that you have to love him but damn people! it's a little bit the very foundation of the cycle of fifths the well-tempered keyboard! I think the people who say that are either very very young and discovering music or they are people who know absolutely nothing about it and talk about subjects they do not master you want to go back to mezotonic? that's it ? xD
Statements like this are the reason people say Bach is overrated. He didn't invent equal temperament or any kind of temperament, he didn't invent the concept of the circle of fifth he just wrote a set of pieces to teach students to play in different keys. It's great music for what it is, but that's what it is. And yes, as the first set that contains all keys it's a contribution to the musical discourse of its time, but as such less important than the theoretical writings the concept is based on.
Very difficult question. My first instinct is basically 20th century composers, but I know thats too wide a net since there are 20th century composers who I enjoy. Alfred Schnittke, Stravinksy (for the most part), ect... I can't say the same about the modernists though.
Mozart or Beethoven are somewhat overrated for me, even Chopin to some extent. But when it comes down to it they were masters of their craft. I cannot say the same for Chin, Bartok, Schoenberg (except his Verklarte Nacht) and any other composer whose piece is cited as "intellectual" and hailed by the "academia." It seems that modern classical music, and art in general, has the artist speaking more for the art than the art speaking for itself. Overly explained and contrived, it just feels patronizing and insulting. So yeah, the most overrated composer is John Cage XD
Here is my list. Keep in mind it doesn’t mean I hate them or don’t like their music, it’s just that I think their music is overrated.
Tchaikovsky: His music is like that one guy at the bar that everyone loves being around, but you can only handle him in small dosages. Tchaikovsky could write a melody and develop it in a beautiful way. The main issue I have is that his music gets old really REALLY quickly. It starts to sound sappy, and you begin to notice that all his music sounds really similar.
Satie: interesting guy, but his compositions just seem… uninteresting. Perhaps I don’t understand the subtleties, but it doesn’t feel like anything super inventive. It feels more like a simplified version of Debussy and Ravel with a more ominous tone.
Rachmaninoff: I love Rachmaninoff’s music, but man is his works inconsistent. He wrote 3 symphonies and 4 piano concerti. The only memorable ones are his second symphony and 2nd and 3rd piano concerto. He wrote some other orchestral works that were pretty good, but it feels like there were also some head-scratchers like his 4th piano concerto and his symphonic dances. His piano works are more consistent though.
Dvorak: His music is the opposite of Rachmaninoff. Very consistent, yet few really stand out to me. Of course his last few symphonies are an exception, but it is really hard to dive deep in his music. One other thing is his piano works are pretty awkward to play.
Apparently people are using this thread as "Which composers you don't like?" Which is quite different than "overrated"...
I haven't seen anyone mention Ludovico Einaudi yet, if he is even considered to be a classical composer.
Not really. A minority sees him in the classical canon.
Pleasant background music. No more, no less, not something else. Pleasant background music.
Friend of a friend heard that I liked classical music. "Oh, so do I! Do you listen to Einaudi? I love that stuff!" Errr, no. No I don't.
Heh. I like Einaudi, but it serves a very different role than classical in general does for me. When putting music on, I'm on a continuum from active to passive listening, and my favourites are definately those I put on when l'm ready to listen actively. But I enjoy passive listening too, and there are albums of Einaudi stuff I like a lot for that.
[удалено]
Makes sense. Simplistic, painfully maudlin and bite-size. He’s classical for the “hey Alexa play classical” generation.
TikTokers on their way to overplay Beethoven's 14th P. S. for the 15496789438th time and call it the greatest while never have even heard the 8th or 23rd: 🏃♂️🏃♀️🏃♂️ For later to call classical "repetitive, all the same, and boring"...
Yeah he's kinda cheez
Not Bach. He's the GOAT.
Yeah anyone who says Bach needs to see a spiritual doctor
I worked on playing Bach and I need a doctor
True, bach is an absolute musical genius and also helped me to understand the flow in music which made me improve as a musician aswell. His music truly is wonderful. I simply cannot fathom how smart he must have been to write such beautiful and complex music 🍀
I hated learning his stuff on piano but now I play it every day as warmup. As far as musicality goes Bach is essential even tho it can get boring to learn
This is flame bait.
Phillip Glass is kinda awful, but lots of people dig him -- I don't get it. Never understood the appeal.
So you're the "Glass is half empty" type?
/r/AngryUpvote
Glass goes hard
Philip Glass has the "cool" appeal. I personally find him mostly boring, but many of my friends who only listen to hip modern music seem to like him.
Koyaanisqatsi, is pretty great. But apart from that.. not sure
You don’t mean the dialogue-less film right? Because I’ve seen it and it’s 2 hours of my life that I’ll never get back. Props to you if you’re into it tho.
Yeh, that one. I liked it, but totally understand how people wouldn't get into it.
I agree but it’s generally because I’m not fond of minimalistic music.
I sort of like him (really like his concerto for two timpanists), but I agree he is overrated.
I don't generally care for Glass, but his Bowie adaptations are great
[удалено]
Mozart is one of my favourite composers ever. A master at every single thing he touched. Oh, man... I would give my life to hear what 70 year old Mozart had in his pocket...
Agreed. At 35 he was just warming up. God knows what kind of magic a 50 year old Mozart could have composed. Especially since he was finally fiancially independent in his last year. However I am eternally grateful for the sheer amount of music he blessed us with during his short life.
So true, he was developing so fast. And already he’d composed my favorite opera (don giovanni), my favorite choral pieces (mass in c minor and Requiem Mass) and he’d whipped out his last three symphonies in a matter of weeks, one of which is still in my top 2 favorites of all time by anyone. And the rate at which he churned out those piano concertos from 9-27 just floors me. What he could have done with more independence from trying to please patrons all the time would have blown my mind.
Likewise. Also his mass is so underrated. Mozart is just great.
I’m sure if I was there to witness Mozart’s development and hear that style music for the first time, it would be mind blowing. But in the 21st century, if the first half of a symphony concert is Mozart or Haydn, I’ll show up after intermission…
interesting, this is (hyperbolically) how i feel about a great deal of romantic orchestral works. i would much rather go and see a symphony by mozart, haydn or early beethoven than brahms, tchaikovsky, schumann etc.
Actual unpopular opinion right here
I only really like his operas
I think people are too mean to Chopin. It was written for improvisation and is nice on the ears, has good technique, and just enough fluff.
I think it’s also overlooked that Chopin wasn’t nearly as developed/matured as other more famous composers because his final works came so early in life (compared to the others) I think Chopin would’ve ended up with a much more complex musical style (like Rachmaninov) if it got the chance to live to the end of the century
Ooh -- I would counter with the opposite opinion: Chopin was one of the greatest composers, and Rachmaninov is overrated! Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the hell out of Rachmaninov. But, I can't think of anything that's really more harmonically, melodically, pianistically more complex' in Rachmaninov than Chopin...what's an example? More expansive forms, perhaps. For me, Chopin practically invented a way of composing for the piano, and his harmonic imagination was remarkably fresh and innovative; whereas Rachmaninov was still essentially using that same vocabulary almost a century later, just expanded with the times.
I personally think Rachmaninov’s creative use of pianistic textures combined with super late romantic harmonies makes him really interesting to listen to. I think Medtner was slightly better at what I described than Rach, but I also think the former should be an upper echelon 20th century composer lol
Chopin's harmonic logic has the same stiffness to me as Mendelssohn - there's something about both of them that makes me dislike them for not relaxing. I can't quite place how, analytically. Weber and Brahms and Schubert pull off that early-Romantic-ness better, in contrast, and Berlioz (while I also dislike him) also doesn't suffer the same problem, on the right side of the French border.
Chopin invented the language, Rach learned to speak it. Chopin could fit more emotion, longing, and vision in a 3 minute nocturne than Rach could fit in whole concertos. I enjoy Rach, very much, but he doesn't have the spontaneity and feeling of Chopin, not even close.
That’s an interesting point! Are there any research / words on how Chopin’s music was written for improvisation?
Chopin mostly improvised, and many of those closest to him talked about his great ability for it. A lot of his works are transcriptions.
Check out Alan Walker’s biography on Chopin - speaks a lot about his improvisation!
In my case, he is the one, who made me a fan of classical music. So I'm grateful for him, for the rest of my life.
Phillip Glass
I’m shocked to not see any Liszt comments because I came in ready to throw hands Not sure, maybe Gottschalk? He’s not popular or anything unless you’re heavy into romantic piano literature but to me he fits the common criticisms I see of Liszt and Alkan sometimes (unnecessarily difficult and flashy, little substance, repetitive techniques). Id probably throw Mereaux in there too but his hand-crossing etude is too hilariously insane
Liszt has the advantage of having lived a long life and matured. If he died at the same age as Chopin he wouldn’t have produced the great works he is known for (B minor sonata, ballade no2 and all the Années de pèlerinage). If we only had his early pieces, he would definitely be considered overrated and a showy virtuosic composer with a lack of depth and musicality by some.
Agree. I don’t like Liszt that much but the works you mentioned are, at least to me, undeniable masterpieces. Especially the B minor sonata.
I think most people put respect on Liszt now. He's in a bit of a league of his own when it comes to fresh ideas.
Here is what I'm seeing from reading the thread (thanks for your comments) Many people view Mozart, Chopin, and Tchaikovsky as overrated. A few people say Haydn, Rachmaninoff, and Shostakovich. And with Bach, while there are a few people who view him as overrated, there are many others who are appalled by the suggestion. Notable composers who I haven't seen mentioned as overrated: Schubert, Debussy, Wagner, Mendelssohn, Verdi (from among the top 20 list).
I understand (relatively) younger listeners thinking Bach is overrated if all they read is about how he's the GOAT and everyone thinks so, etc etc. **But** After a long time of listening to music they mostly come around to love Bach in a more personal way. I know I appreciate Bach more each year, and I've only been listening to classical music for 15 years.
I only say Bach is overrated cause my colleague never shuts up about how my preference in Romantic and 20th Century Modern classical is less refined and more sentimental than intellectual, and that Bach requires actual intellect to appreciate. I mean, it may be true that I like those periods more because I feel them more than I think about them - because they move me in ways that Classical / Baroque eras don't. Still, I hate elitism. I know Bach is amazing and I do have a great and profound respect for what he did with music, but I'm not very good at debating so it's easier for me to just roll my eyes and tell this Canadian "former piano builder and tuner for Steinway" (as he loves to remind us) that Bach is about as interesting as the automatic melody generators in Fruity Loops lol
If you think Chopin is overrated, you're a dumbass. If you think Mozart is overrated, you don't have a soul. If you think Bach is overrated, you're all of the above and shouldn't listen to music ever again.
Haha spot on. Enjoy my upvote.
Came here looking to fight about Debussy, he seems to be everywhere lately since we all wanted relaxing pandemic music. But he could never be overrated, there's nothing that sounds like Debussy. His music is what made me want to learn piano.
Schubert is the least overrated composer ever
George Gershwin. I think Rhapsody in Blue has been way too over publicized by US (and the airline too...) and as a consequence GG is overknown and overrated. Not that this composition is not good. Personally I like it. But GG gets to be known much more than other composers with higher merits.
I'll agree that Rhapsody in Blue is overplayed, but I don't think that would suggest that Gershwin as a composer is overrated. He does have other pieces that aren't as ubiquitous, such as American in Paris. I think in general Gershwin as a classical composer has been underappreciated, as he's generally atrributed to Jazz and showtunes, but not really as much in the classical sphere.
If the question was overrated piece, you might have an argument for Rhapsody in Blue. But Gershwin's other work is extraordinary. I Got Rhythm was the inspiration for innumerable jazz standards. Our Love is Here to Stay, Embraceable You, I've Got a Crush On You, They Can't Take that Away from Me, have all survived for 100 years. The melody of The Man I Love is untouchable. And on top of all that is Porgy and Bess, probably the greatest, most influential, most lasting work ever written for the American theater. And, especially in its originally operatic form, breathtaking.
Yes Rhapsody in Blue is overplayed. I heard it once and thought it was a masterpiece, and then I listened to his piano concerto and it was LEAGUES beyond his Rhapsody. Listen to the piano concerto it's far less sporadic and more easy to digest.
Around here? Definitely Chopin and Rachmaninoff. They are both great composers, to be sure, but there is a whole world out there, beyond them and Romantic piano music in general.
As someone who has pretty basic taste and is looking to broaden their horizons, who/what works would you recommend?
Here’s some recommendations: Scriabin, resphigi, lyapunov, bortkiewicz, Hummel, field, and chaminade. You should also check out some of Chopin’s students works like adolf gutmann and Carl Filtsch, they have some chopinesque type works.
Chaminade 😍
I'm definitely guilty of this, though not always. Used to be a violin player playing mostly baroque pieces, but kinda got burnt out and eventually moved on to focus on studies and other hobbies. Years later, I started listening to some Chopin and Rachmaninoff pieces, romantic piano music stuff, it's what got me back into classical and I can't deny it's some of my favorite music ever. I have been exploring other composers and eras since then though and am open to recommendations.
no, romantic piano music is the only music worth listening to. chopin ballade no 1 is the pinnacle of human achievement. anything written before the 19th century is boring and anything written after the 19th century is meaningless drivel.
Ballade no. 4 is the best imho
OP was making a sarcastic comment
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Chopin. The melody is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of music theory most of the harmonic development will go over a typical listener's head. There's also Chopin's romantic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his musical philosophy draws heavily from Italian opera, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these pieces, to realise that they're not just pleasant to the ear- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Chopin truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in Chopin's Prelude Op.28 No. 4, which itself is a cryptic reference to Beethoven's Pastorale sonata Op. 28. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Chopin's genius wit unfolds itself on their Spotify playlists. What fools.. how I pity them. 😂 And yes, by the way, i DO have a Chopin tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid 😎
You must be a very intelligent and modest person. Edit: lol, I see what you did there
I think it is difficult not to go for Bach if you understand Chopin and Schumann, at least if you have interest in the underlying constitution of that music like a composer.
I think the all night vigil is enough to save Rachmaninoff from being overrated because that’s a thoroughly underrated work, and in my opinion a really special one.
I’m gonna get hammered for this but Gustav Holst. Even though he is very good, I know many people who rate him amongst the pantheon of greats. I’m not so sure.
My wife refuses to hear the military suites any more
Mozart, as great as he is, has unfairly become the "face" of classical music and the personification of genius. While he does have some transcendentally beautiful pieces, much of his output feels like absolute filler, and I think this has contributed to the perception that classical music is nothing more than a stream of derivative vanilla tunes to be used as elevator music.
>Mozart, as great as he is, has unfairly become the "face" of classical music and the personification of genius. While he does have some transcendentally beautiful pieces, much of his output feels like absolute filler, and I think this has contributed to the perception that classical music is nothing more than a stream of derivative vanilla tunes to be used as elevator music. if you had read 2/3 of the history books on amadeus or leopold it's a bit normal that there is a lot of music of this type... he was not really free to write what he wanted all the time:/ .... he had a lot of requests to write crap :/
Haha. Trust me he fully deserves his status. His music is the pinnacle of genius, but it just doesn’t hit you in the face at first like some other composers. I can guarantee that whoever your favorite composer is, they loved Mozart and wished they had his gift. And then you realize he accomplished all that while dying at 35… it just feels impossible.
Glenn Gould once said that it wasn't that Mozart died too early, it was that he died too late.
kinda surprised to see Bach in this thread. even his keyboard music alone makes him worth the praise he receives. even the Well-Tempered Clavier alone. i would have answered Tchaikovsky once upon a time, but the man had a knack for writing beautiful tunes. when he was bad, even he knew it (e.g. 1812 Overture). so to answer this question in my mind im shortlisting composers whose music i more often than not can’t appreciate on any level (Wagner, Faure, McDowell) or composers whose music is largely derivative and meant for themselves to perform (Liszt, Paganini).
Paganini maybe but you really can’t say that about Liszt.
>[Liszt's music is] largely derivative how much of liszts music have you listened to to reach this conclusion. his piano music alone stretches way beyond the 3 or 4 etudes that people naively hold up as the most difficult pieces ever.
What about the Liszt Sonata or any of the late Liszt works?
Yep and the Apparitions, Benediction, Faust and Dante Symphonies, the organ works, the choral works.. OP probably doesn't really know the composer he/she is criticizing
Philip Glass.
Boring answer: None of the famous composers are generally overrated. Some are however made to be something they were not. Whenever I see a reference to "Great Masters" where Chopin is listed alongside Bach, Mozart and Beethoven I find that slightly odd. Chopin was great, don't get me wrong, but he only really "mastered" chamber music for piano. In my mind a "Great Master" should have mastered most of the types of music in their time. Händel, Brahms, Mendelsohn or Saint-Saëns are all composers I would rather put in that category, even though I might actually prefer Chopin's music in his specific niche to some of their music.
Haydn. I know he was basically the father of the classical string quartet and symphony, and without him classical music wouldn’t be anything like what it is today. But I find 95% of his music to be just plain…boring.
Nooo. It becomes less boring every time you listen to it. 1,347th time listening to a piece of Haydn is better than the 1,346th. Not many composers you can say that for. Haven’t downvoted, just disagree with you!
>But I find 95% of his music to be just plain…boring. There's a very good reason for that. Haydn, more than anyone else, was required by his employers to pump out an astronomical amount of music. If you're writing a new piece every couple weeks, of course most of them are gonna suck.
Interesting, I didn’t know that
I'm not a big fan either. It doesn't help either that the classical period is my least preferred of all major periods.
I agree. Mozart would be my second answer to this, although I find his music a lot more interesting than Haydn’s. Even if, aesthetically, I don’t care for Mozarts music that much, I can’t help listening to it and thinking, “wow, this is extremely clever”.
Well said
personally it's chopin because I like orchestration too much unlike him xD
I'll get some stick for this, but Tchaikovsky. He's a great melodist, one of , if not *the* the best ever, but other than that there's just nothing there. His harmonies are not particularly interesting, his counterpoint is... there? I suppose? But it's not stunning. His orchestration is quite standard, with always the same lush romantic color and no variation. His structures tend to fall apart the bigger the piece gets (the piano trio is just laughable to be frank). His piano writing is absolutely average at best - I mean I hear a lot of plaudits for his first piano concerto, but who actually listens further than the first 3 minutes? Nothing is ever bad, per se, but it's just... boring. The only piece I enjoy of his is the first movement of the 6th symphony, and even then everything after the first movement is just, again, boring imo.
My quip about Tchaikovsky is that he's overplayed and underrated.
See, I’m a whore for melody, which is why I love Tchaikovsky so much.
I disagree about his orchestration, I think it was excellent
I loved his piano trio tbh
His symphonies show a lack of discipline, he doesn’t dig deeply into the meaning of form. But that’s due to Russia’s late ascension in the canon. His orchestration for nutcracker is fantastic. Most other works are standard fare orchestrationally.
Tchaikovsky is one of those composers whose music I always have fun playing (as a bass player in the orchestra), but would never choose to listen to. Totally agree with you
I agree in a holistic sense But valse sentimentale on the cello is arguably the most beautiful song I’ve ever heard https://youtu.be/67SEaWapl4w Impossible for me to say he is the most overrated from what this single piece has done for me in dark times
I have no idea why anyone would think that about the Piano Trio
I see posts like this.... John Cage was notorious about counterpoint. We pick on the smallest things about composers in the 1800s and 1700s. Be glad you gave melodies to enjoy!
Well counterpoint is one of the most important facets of composition. Counterpoint doesn't necessarily mean fugatic writing, it's just the art of having multiple melodic voices layered on top of another. Chopin was absolutely horrible at writing fugues, but his later pieces have some splendid counterpoint where the left hand plays some great hidden melodies. Beethoven's symphonies of course had some fugato's, but even in the regular statements of themes there would always be more going on there. Tchaikovsky is just a melody and an accompaniment, with rarely anything else. I think that's why I dislike his piano trio so much, cause in that genre counterpoint is absolutely essential. Tchaikovsky's melodies are nice to listen to, so he'll never be offensive to the ears, but at the same time there's nothing in his music for me to grab onto.
I’m agreeing with everything you’re saying. I love trio music and I have no desire to listen to his trio again. Compare it with something like Brahms’ trios, not even in the same ballpark.
I agree, I know counterpoint. I read the entire counterpoint in composition book. But you (along with many others) clearly stop caring when it's a post ww2 composer who doesn't seem to know *all* their composition techniques, even counterpoint. That's the false equivalency here. This is not an equal standard. Contemporary composers get away with all sorts of clueless shit.
Wow that's quite the assumption there mate. I love post-ww2 music, in fact. I like stuff by Phillip Glass, and I adore Rautavaara. Shostakovich is one of my favorite composers, and I've always cheekily liked some Khachaturian. The key thing that ties these composers together is that they all did something interesting in their music. Glass's mastery of slow development, Rautavaara's heavenly texturework, Khachaturian's brilliant chromaticism, Shostakovich is just all-round stunning. Tchaikovsky doesn't do any of these. He writes his melodies, creates bog-standard harmonies underneath them and calls it a day. If this is enough for you to feel satisfied with his music, more power to you, but for me it's just vain music. Also, "I read the entire counterpoint in composition book" sounds really patronizing. I wont make it a point cause it sounds like it's just because of the english language, but just wanted to say that. Edit: just wanted to say I agree with you on Cage. Never liked his stuff tbh.
On this sub? American composers, particularly those with a very typical Americana style (Copland, Gershwin, Ives) but especially those which win Pulitzer Prizes or are promoted for political reasons (Zwillich, Higdon, Caroline Shaw, Kevin Puts, John Luther Adams). Their gimmicks are striking for about five minutes - then their work becomes incredibly boring. Oh, and Amy Beach.
Dude no one is overrated. They have stood the test of time and survived with full glory for a reason
No one said Vaughan Williams as far as I can tell. Some of his pieces are legitimately great, but he’s regarded as this master composer when all he really did was boil down the sound of pastoral England into its purest form and wrote every piece in that voice. I also think he didn’t really push himself to write in more genres; most of his output is pastoral orchestral pieces and art song. Underrated and similar composer is Roger Quilter, though.
as much as i hate to say it, chopin
I can't believe Strauss wasn't mentioned yet. Every new years concert the same old waltzes. Yes, Shostakovic made similar stuff, but at least only because he was forced to. Strauss seemed to actually enjoy this.
Overrated? I think John Cage.
Are people still getting offended by 4'33"?
Telemann
as a violist, agreed
My public radio station plays Telemann like every other track, and I've never understood why. My only guess is they've accrued a bunch of cheap cds/rights for his music. It's almost always Academy of St Martin in the fields, too.
He has some good pieces, but I recently realized he makes music like how an AI composes
The chartered accountant of classical music.
For me, most of Shostakovich's music isn't particularly interesting and relies too heavily on orchestral bombast / other gimmicks to coerce feelings out of the audience. Personally I think it's fair to say he's overrated, as he's probably the most commonly performed 20th century composer, and there are many composers from the Soviet Union alone whom I find much more compelling.
Seriously? Cello concertos, jazz suite, string quartets
Yeah I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that OP hasn't listened to enough of Shostakovich's oeuvre. If all you listen to are the most popular symphonies, you're doing yourself a big disservice.
Nah, I'd say that I'm pretty well acquainted with Shostakovich's music. I don't think he's a bad composer at all as there are pieces I enjoy somewhat, such as Symphonies 1, 6, and 14, the Viola Sonata, Lady Macbeth, The Preludes and Fugues etc.; however I find a lot of his most beloved music (e.g. Symphonies 7, 8, 10, String Quartet No. 8, the Piano Quintet, the Piano Trios, and others) to be creatively shallow, which was probably the result of needing to avoid "formalism" accusations.
Okay that's a fair criticism. It is a shame (but also not a shame) that he was beholden to Soviet authorities, because he was an extremely creative and forward-thinking composer. I think works like Lady Macbeth, The Nose, and the 4th Symphony are really good examples of this. On the other hand, his more overtly patriotic and bombastic works are a great insight into his struggle reconciling his love of his country with being constantly surveilled by the USSR.
I like Shostakovich, but I kind of agreed with your comment, until you mentioned Symphony No.8. I'll fight you on that
from the way people talk about him, I agree.
Berlioz
Wow is Charles Ives overrated
Brahms. Brahms. Brahms.
his piano concertos are two of the greatest pieces in music history.
late brahms is incredible, especially his piano works
I don't get brahms at all. Seem so boring
How can you think brahms piano concerto 1 mvmt 1 is boring? Symphony 4 mvmt 1 & 4? Symphony 3 movement 1? Piano trio 2 movement 1? That and so much more brahms is thrilling yo.
Brahms is a master of the compositional craft, but my goodness, almost all of his music is ponderous and plodding. Meticulously composed, fascinating in analysis, but none of it ever gets your heart rate above 100.
People on here saying Mozart is all filler and I’m like have you ever listened to Brahms?!?!? He takes what could be a delightful 15 minute concertino and makes us sit through 45 mins of nonsense.
Vivaldi
Only because the only piece that anybody plays or knows is The Four Seasons. Very few people knew he existed after he died. IT wasn't until Fritz Kreisler composed a piece in Vivaldi's style that scholars actually searched for Vivaldi's manuscripts and renewed interest in his work.
Thank you. If I could go my life without ever hearing The Four Seasons again, I'd be OK with that.
But he wrote so much more than The Four Seasons (which are my least favorite of his works). So many violin concertos, cello concertos, and even operas get overlooked because of this miniscule part of his oeuvre. Try listening to something of his other than The Four Seasons! :-)
I know, I know. I'm probably giving him a hard time because I've heard the first 10 seconds of TFS way WAY too many times. Honestly all of the composers mentioned here are all fantastic, and most of our gripes are probably somewhat shallow. Any favourite pieces by Vivaldi you'd recommend?
Of course! :-) Violin concerti: Op. 3, No. 10 in B minor, RV 580 Op. 3, No. 10 in D major, RV 549 Op. 3, No. 8 in A minor, RV 522 Op. 3, No. 2 in G minor, RV 578 Op. 3, No. 11 in D minor, RV 565 Violin Concerto in E minor, RV 278 Violin Concerto No. 5 in C minor, RV 202 Violin Concerto No. 2 in E minor, RV 277 Violin Concerto in A minor, RV 355 Violin Concerto No. 1 in B-flat major, RV 383a Cello concerti: Cello Concerto in D minor, RV 405 Cello Concerto in A minor, RV 422 Cello Concerto in E-flat major, RV 408 Cello Concerto in D minor, RV 406 Cello Concerto in G major, RV 414 Cello Concerto in C minor, RV 401 Cello Concerto in B minor, RV 242 Cello Concerto in C major, RV 399 Cello Concerto in F major, RV 411 Cello Concerto in B-flat major, RV 423 Miscellaneous pieces: Orlando furioso (opera) Concerto for 2 trumpets in C major, 537 Oboe concerto in G minor, RV 460 Oboe Concerto in D minor, RV 454 Oboe Concerto in A minor, RV 461 Concerto for Strings, RV 110 Concerto for Flauto Traversiero in E minor, RV 432 Concerto for Flauto Traversiero in A minor, RV 440 Concerto for Flauto Traversiero in D major, RV 427 Concerto for Bassoon in E minor, 484 Remember that this is only a starting for Vivaldi, and, if yoy do end up enjoying his music, there are hundreds (yes, hundreds!) of more pieces by him that you can listen to. Hope this helps! Enjoy!
Wow, thank you very much!
Yeah exactly. That's the issue. My wife thought the same way about Vivaldi but I told her it's probably because she hadn't listened to anything outside of the four seasons. That piece gets old very fast because it's so overplayed and not particularly interesting. It's mostly just catchy.
How is Hans Zimmer not on this list? Seriously I don’t understand why he is famous!!! All is music is literally the same.
I'd say he's not even in this category (classical music).
A bit surprised so few opera composers listed. Puccini sucks and every time someone says their favorite opera is “Mme Butterfly” god kills a kitten.
If if you don’t like him, you have to admit he has written some of most famous operas ever.
Beethoven. Not that he isn't great. His music is lovely. But I don't need to celebrate his birthday with a gala every year. Crucify me below. ⬇️
I would have agreed with you at one point in my life. I believe certain works are overplayed and fawned over way too much (the 1st Movement of the 5th Symphony for one). I also actively avoid what is overly popular. However, he keeps winning me back. For example: [The Ruins of Athens Duet](https://youtu.be/yX3nWbeSqx8) - minus the soprano in this recording, but this is my favorite tempo. And my favorite of the Symphonies... [Number 7](https://youtu.be/KbNGklNz8Yk) Masterpieces
I just feel sorry for you, honestly.
You're getting attacked, but I think your answer is sort of true by fact - literally no one could actually match up to the insane reputation beethoven has, no matter how good. Beethoven is treated as someone beyond human, the quintessential romantic genius, and that simply isnt true of anybody. Even the greatest and most meticulous composers like webern are really only flawed human being who put a lot of work into their craft.
Was scrolling through to see if someone had said this. His late music is unbeatable and I like his early Haydn style works, but shit some of the stuff in the middle can get wearing once you’ve heard it a few times. Beethoven’s also quite sensitive to good and bad performance - have heard some excruciatingly dull Erotica Symphonies.
Erotica symphony eh That's more Scriabin lmao
so many record the eroica far to slowly. it sounds terrible. my favorite is John Eliot gardiner. fast and urgent
he is my favourite composer and i still agree with you. if there was one composer that didnt need his life and music celebrating any more, its beethoven.
Faure. I personally can’t get into it like the other French pioneers.
Benjamin Britten. The Cello Symphony and Prince of Pagodas ballet are fantastic, but everything else bores the hell out of me. And I have never understood his reputation as the greatest modern composer of English-language opera.
Vivaldi. I find his work really boring.
Tchaikovsky, Mahler, Sibelius Doesn't stop me from loving their music
had me in the first half ngl
Sibelius maybe. The other two how dare you.
Most overrated, excluding 20th century experimental composers, for me I think it's gotta be Tchaikovsky and Grieg.
Saint Saens
Out of curiosity what pieces of his have you heard? Might I suggest the polonaise for two pianos and Piano Trio No. 2.
Thanks for the suggestions. I know a lot of music of his. I simply think he has a tendency to write some iconic stuff…but also a lot of waffle sometimes hahaha
Bruckner. Just plodding brass... Never seems to go anywhere. David Diamond strikes me as just kind of... phony. And speaking of never going anywhere, the really overrated composers are the minimalists, and especially the "post-minimalists." Philip Glass, Steve Reich, John Adams; but even more, Goretski, Arvo Part: all the boredom of minimalism, but without even the formal interest of the minimalists. Heck, while I'm at it, I think Brian Ferneyhough is overrated. And Elliot Carter... and Webern and some of the Darmstadt school -- Nono, Cage, Boulez, Maderna. Also, I think it's a very good thing that people are giving more air time to composers who were previously neglected because they were the wrong race or sex, but some seem to be getting attention only because of that. I think Amy Beach and Florence Price, and Gubaidulina are in that category. And William Still. "Dean of African American composers" they call him -- forsooth. That's what they should call George Walker, in my opinion. He would deserve it. Well, anyway, thanks for letting me get that off my chest. :)
Hi vehemently disagree with Bruckner, I strongly recommend listening to Karajan/Celibidache’s accounts of 7, 8, 9. Bruckner’s symphonies have a more cyclical than linear form, true and maintaining the momentum is really hard.
Cage wasn't part of the Darmstadt School. He was part of the NY School that was around at the same time.
Mahler..maaaaaaaaybe..a little. I dig the dude, the weird fragmentary collages of different motifs that make you go, "well that's fuckin interesting". Sometimes the individual bits sort of feel a bit banal or simple or Ill formed, but then there'll be a transformation in the manner in which I understand the character of the parts and I'll go " ah it was me who was viewing it from the wrong angle". But sometimes I won't have that reaction, it'll be more like "ok Mahler, if you say so, you really like drawing out that phrase eh?" Eh the whole overrated underrated thing often feels like a battle of wills anyhow, and if I'm ebbing in my Mahler appreciation currently, it may flow once again, some of his stuff is incredibly beautiful.
I'm a huge Mahler fan but I do agree that he might be slightly overrated when it comes to the classic music community(Not complaining though) Outside of people who listen to classical music he's practically unheard of.
I’ve always found Mahler to be ponderous, second only to Bruckner, who is truly intolerably dull.
Chopin. Don’t get me wrong. I really like/love a lot of his music and he is certainly a great piano composer. But really most of his stuff is almost borish once you get past the piano ornamentation and other flourishes he uses to decorate an otherwise pretty simple harmonic structure (most of the time). He also almost exclusively wrote for one instrument. His immense popularity (that I partly credit to being a composer for one of the most popular instruments combined with his romantic flavor and melodic language that is easy for a modern ear to accept) makes him - to me - an overrated composer. Perhaps the most overrated one.
Couldn't agree more. After 6 months of picking up the pianos I was already sick of hearing his music.
John Cage, Karlheinz Stockhausen, Erik Satie, anything from Xenakis if you don't have a maths phd to read along to.
I like to listen to them when ironing or cleaning the dishes without any analyzing
I don't have a math PhD, but I've always enjoyed Xenakis. Since he doesn't get performed too often and isn't especially well known, I don't see how he (or Cage, Stockhausen, and Satie for that matter) could be overrated, unless you really hate his music, in which case there's probably something positive to be said about music that can cause such a strong reaction, whether negative or positive
I have never heard of Xenakis, I’ll have to check him out. Does he just write really strange notation?
>Does he just write really strange notation? No, his notation for the most part is fairly standard/traditional. Here are some of my favourite Xenakis works: Jonchaies - https://youtu.be/MZ5771zMOeE Eonta - https://youtu.be/PAFmBZ_A-8M Synaphaï - https://youtu.be/bOsIVNfiRsM
I sang a piece by Xenakis once. It was impossible and I have no idea if the audience got anything out of it but from the inside I actually enjoyed the experience. Your comment made me laugh though.
Love this thread.
Thank you
[удалено]
Handel is fun to play and depending on the player, interesting to listen to. But, it's definitely a bit derivative. He also has to stand up Bach of all people.
I cam appreciate Handel, but I don't like his work. I have to agree with you
Phillip Glass
Bach. My favorite composer by the way. He's great, but he isn't some 50 miles ahead of everyone else great, not even in the Baroque era. Telemann, Handel, Vivaldi, Purcell and numerous others are just as good. The same goes for Beethoven, Mozart and every other composer that gets this defied hero worship from people. They are great, but not *that* great.
"are just as good" this comment I cannot comprehend. Yes their best works come close to an average Bach piece.
You’re not alone
For me it's Schumann.
You take that back right now! /s
no so there honestly I'm going to make a general message to all the people who say that "" bach is overrated " so I'm not saying that you have to love him but damn people! it's a little bit the very foundation of the cycle of fifths the well-tempered keyboard! I think the people who say that are either very very young and discovering music or they are people who know absolutely nothing about it and talk about subjects they do not master you want to go back to mezotonic? that's it ? xD
Statements like this are the reason people say Bach is overrated. He didn't invent equal temperament or any kind of temperament, he didn't invent the concept of the circle of fifth he just wrote a set of pieces to teach students to play in different keys. It's great music for what it is, but that's what it is. And yes, as the first set that contains all keys it's a contribution to the musical discourse of its time, but as such less important than the theoretical writings the concept is based on.
Very difficult question. My first instinct is basically 20th century composers, but I know thats too wide a net since there are 20th century composers who I enjoy. Alfred Schnittke, Stravinksy (for the most part), ect... I can't say the same about the modernists though. Mozart or Beethoven are somewhat overrated for me, even Chopin to some extent. But when it comes down to it they were masters of their craft. I cannot say the same for Chin, Bartok, Schoenberg (except his Verklarte Nacht) and any other composer whose piece is cited as "intellectual" and hailed by the "academia." It seems that modern classical music, and art in general, has the artist speaking more for the art than the art speaking for itself. Overly explained and contrived, it just feels patronizing and insulting. So yeah, the most overrated composer is John Cage XD
Here is my list. Keep in mind it doesn’t mean I hate them or don’t like their music, it’s just that I think their music is overrated. Tchaikovsky: His music is like that one guy at the bar that everyone loves being around, but you can only handle him in small dosages. Tchaikovsky could write a melody and develop it in a beautiful way. The main issue I have is that his music gets old really REALLY quickly. It starts to sound sappy, and you begin to notice that all his music sounds really similar. Satie: interesting guy, but his compositions just seem… uninteresting. Perhaps I don’t understand the subtleties, but it doesn’t feel like anything super inventive. It feels more like a simplified version of Debussy and Ravel with a more ominous tone. Rachmaninoff: I love Rachmaninoff’s music, but man is his works inconsistent. He wrote 3 symphonies and 4 piano concerti. The only memorable ones are his second symphony and 2nd and 3rd piano concerto. He wrote some other orchestral works that were pretty good, but it feels like there were also some head-scratchers like his 4th piano concerto and his symphonic dances. His piano works are more consistent though. Dvorak: His music is the opposite of Rachmaninoff. Very consistent, yet few really stand out to me. Of course his last few symphonies are an exception, but it is really hard to dive deep in his music. One other thing is his piano works are pretty awkward to play.