Deryk Barker [[log in to unmask]] wrote:

>So why do I consider Chopin by far the greater composer?

I think recordings are a problem in Schumann.  I have only heard one
recording of the 3rd symphony that felt good, and not shaky.  His music
in this repretoire seems to be difficult to get right.  Thats why he is
regarded having succeeded best as composer in the small piano piece
(i.e.Kinderszenen) repetoire, what I would say is a bit unfair.  But to
return to the original thread: I do consider Mendelssohn a greater
composer than Schumann.

Nick Perovich [[log in to unmask]] wrote:

>Very few symphonic movements by *anybody* make as big an impression on me
>as the "Cologne Cathedral" movement in the "Rhenish" Symphony.

Glazunov made this audio-visual comparision about the finale in Mozarts
"Jupiter"-symphony.  Thats the original quote, although I can agree it fits
for that Schumann Symphony too!

Walter Meyer <[log in to unmask]> speaks:

>If Haydn's earthquake trumps Mozart's failure ever to have written
>a musical description of one, they're both trumped by Honegger and
>Villa-Lobos, each of whom described very convincingly in musical form
>the sound of a steam locomotive.

Though, the winner here is clearly Hans Christian Lumbye with his
"Koebenhavn Jernbane Damp Galop" ["Kopenhagens Steamrailroads Galop"].
Those who have head the nordic Strauss perfectly running locomotive will
know what old Mats is talking about.  For the Swedish listeners; this is
the piece used in Oldsbergs "Paa Spaaret" (if you can accept my way of
writing umlauts)!!

Donald Satz <[log in to unmask]> boasts with his purchases:

>I hadn't acquired any Four Last Songs discs for a long time and was torn
>between Karita and Renee Fleming.

What a pity then you didn't choose the latter!

I ahve not heard so much Renee Fleming on this list in these times, what
makes me little troubled, but I hope Rene is lurking around somewhere:-)

>But, Karita's photograph on the cover was something I could not resist.
>I'm so hopeless.

-2 buyingpoints in penalty for Don Satz!

Scott Morrison <[log in to unmask]>:

>I would have said that about Zemlinsky until last week when I heard the
>Kansas City Symphony play the first movement of Die Seejungfrau [the full
>materials for all three movements didn't arrive in time from Europe] and
>was swept away.

Have you not heard the other movements at all or just this time? Anyway,
if you not have heard it at all, the other movements are very nice too,
and, I would say, have the same quality.  Its my favourite Zemlinsky work,
togehter with the symphony in C.

Roberto Strappafelci <[log in to unmask]> writes:

>The very remote idea of a "Bach vs.  Handel" debate gets on my nerves.
>Even as a joke.

Me too, because all already know Haendel was the better ;-)

Bob Draper <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Just because a segement of the music fraternity have been indoctrinated
>with the populist idea that WAM is the greatest composer of all time it
>doesn't mean we all agree.

Ok, I wonder when I hear people say they don't like Mozart, so I don't say
it, I just say that Mozart is very strict in rythm, and Haydn is a high
quality more bouncing alternative.

>He developed symphonic form thus WAM could write his inferior symphonies,

Agreed.

>He invented the Schertzo,

And the draw this to its greatest extent: he introduced humor in music,
which I rank as one of his finest qualities.  The opening of symphony nr.60
 ["Il distratto"] with its tunings and the slavonic march is just excellent,
as one example out of many...

>He wrote the first symphony with a slow ending (ditto)

Mr. Drapers reasons I enjoyed he told about, but isn't this fig-talk?
I can see it as "Haydn had the ability - what in many cases are a sign
of genial greatness - to think above the already set and accepted rules
to create a paradigmchange, like he did when developing the sonata form",
and that many great men did, Napoleons reformation of military conquest
technique is the same thing and so on.  But should anyone had been able
to write a symphony with slow ending, or will my talk here end up with
me sitting with "Columbi Eggs" on my face???!

>No one has yet mentioned the excellent songs without words.

And that says Mendelssohn was indeed *in his time* considered a greater
compsoer than Schumann, and that thanks to this beloved works, who many
tried to copy.

Donald Satz ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>>The clear winner in a ten round decision is Schumann.  How did that happen?

You forgot 12 of Mendelssohns symphonies?

Steven Schwartz <[log in to unmask]>:

>Schumann takes the Mendelssohnian symphony to its height.  Mendelssohn
>wrote one masterful symphony (the Italian) and one very interesting, though
>flawed symphony (the Reformation), but Schumann may have written the three
>finest symphonies between Berlioz and Brahms.  Nevertheless, he not only
>uses Mendelssohn's procedures, but to a great extent appropriates his
>idioms.  A draw, perhaps the edge going to Schumann.

First of all: Schumanns "Rheinische" is a masterpiece, though mostly
luddicorously performed in a shaky form, but I for one consider Mendelssohn
a greater symphonist, if I only regard his 5 famous (read: orchestral)
symphonies, the "Italianische" is masterful indeed, but also is the 3rd,
"Schottische".  The opening is very very fine descriptive music painting a
picture of a cold morning in the schottish highlands, and Mendelssohn is
using something that sounds like a genuine schottisch folksong - not too
far from the main melody in the "March of the 'Thistels'" - which makes
my heart go "kloppeti-klopp".  Does anyone know if it really is a genuine
schottish folksong, or if Mendelssohn invented this melody himself? But I
also wanted to those who consider the 5th "Reformation" flawed; why? And
anyway, if it flaws in some I think it has well right to live if not others
so just because of its grand fugual finale (where the "Eine feste Burg ist
unser Gott"-Theme goes in fugue with the undrlying themes...

Mats Norrman
[log in to unmask]