Why it's true for me:

-- While I do indeed believe what I said in my grinning post, i.e. that Bach really is the "most emotional" composer, some other composers' type of 'emotional' is more my kind. Let's see, what's an analogy: Onion has more taste than vanilla, but vanilla is more my kind of taste. How's that.

-- Plus: I don't play Bach that much (and have never played it in public except in arrangement), because I don't feel I can do it well enough. Bach is enough of "my kind of emotional" that I'd play it much more and talk about it much more, if I played it more.

BTW, didn't mean Bach is like onion and the others are like vanilla, just couldn't quickly come up with something better.

I think those stupid faces are silly.

Mark_C wouldn't dare use a smiley!

I have recently learned Bach's Italian Concerto and I never knew how much I could come to love his music. I can't stop playing it.

rada

Other than the Goldberg Variations (of which I've learnt the Aria and some 10 variations so far) and his Keyboard Partitas No.1 and 6, I actually prefer Bach's vocal and other instrumental music to his keyboard ones. Among the former I love are his motets (three of which I sang at school), his St Matthew and St John Passions, and his Christmas Oratorio (which I listened complete right through from a BBC broadcast just two days ago, and marvelled anew at the wonderful music, especially in Part 2), and his Partitas No.2 - with the famous Chaconne - and No.3 for solo violin (some of dances in the latter having been transcribed, with added piquant harmonies, by Rachmaninoff), and his solo Cello Suites.

For me, his most memorable music lies in those. What would a violinist do without Bach?

Vivaldi?

Don't you need at least a harpsichordist to help you get through him?

At first I was tempted to laugh at this, but on second thought, Vivaldi's church music is actually magnificent, so heartfelt... and superbly set.

For those who only know Vivaldi as a composer of endless concertos and stuff, listen to his Gloria (RV 588), or even better the Credo (RV 592).

This was a man who knew his craft, loved his Church, and derived so much spiritual inspiration from it.

IMO, don't worry about the secular music. It's all clean fun, but not where it's at.

Vivaldi's Gloria was the first choral work I learnt to sing when I joined my school choir (along with Haydn's Nelson Mass), but though I still love it, the music doesn't seem to me to plumb the depths of Bach's. It's as if Vivaldi's view of God is not as all-encompassing and spiritual as Bach's (perhaps hardly surprising, as he taught for a long time at a girls' school and wrote a lot of his vocal music for them...).

But what do I, an atheist, know about these things?

Well we do know about the 'girl's school' (hehe), but I never meant to imply that Vivaldi was in any sense greater than Bach. I just felt a need to point out an aspect of Vivaldi which might tend to be overlooked, particularly in a piano forum!

As much as I love love piano music, opera, and chamber music, it is church and organ music which I love the most. Briefly -very briefly!- I considered going into the ministry as an Anglican priest, but nah.

Well, I do like Bach's keyboard music, but I like his large choral-orchestral works, cantatas, motets, and solo cello and violin suites even more. Same with Felix Mendelssohn and his output, and even Brahms. I feel their non-piano output is even greater than their pianistic output. Particularly Mendelssohn and his choral works.

Mark, you compare Bach (onion) to other composers (vanilla). Why exactly do you think Bach's music is emotionally stronger than others'? You and I both love Chopin so I will use him as an example. (plus he just makes a good example for this case) I don't think anyone can deny Chopin's level of emotion in a lot of his music. I think it's rather silly to just say "Bach is more emotional than everyone else".

Please pardon my not explaining, among other reasons because it would be hard if not impossible to do it. But let me say, I don't think it was silly to say, although probably 99% of what I say is.

No one is with me on Messiaen?

If you, or someone else, could just provide a little explanation to this fairly common view on this thread that'd be cool. : )

Maybe someone will want to take a swing at it, but I think it would be hard to explain why Bach (or anything) is "emotional."

I mean, could you explain why you find Chopin emotional? And BTW, Chopin is the composer whose 'emotionality' I find the most appealing -- but I'd have a devil of a time explaining why.

I appreciate his music - BUT I wouldn't say it was the MOST rationale or emotional.

But you said Bach was the most emotional composer.


Do you mean most emotional for you personally, or objectively the most emotional?

I don't think there's any such thing as the latter.

That would be making it rational, wouldn't it?

And BTW I don't think there's any such thing as saying objectively what's the most rational either, nor explaining rationally why something is the most rational. Any such explanations would be, well, subjective.

I agree that Messiaen is highly rational and emotional. But his emotions, while beautiful, are a little scary to me: a fierce embrace of the universal cosmos, an awesome plunge into joy and ecstasy. He's one of my favorite composers, but his vision doesn't always fit into my day-to-day life.

Bach, on the other hand, writes about *me*, even while, at the same time, his music ticks to a cosmic clock.


-Jason