Look, we've been through this already. For the umpteenth time, jazziness doesn't not equal jazz! You're talking to a guy who almost majored in piano for Pete's sake, and I'm one of the handful that have studied both classical and jazz seriously. It really speaks volumes that you're holding up boogie-woogie as a "sort" of jazz. That's like saying ragtime is a form of jazz when it is in fact a precursor. Just so you know I'm a great admirer of Beethoven's Op. 111 myself. To me it's the single greatest piano sonata ever written, and it's otherworldly music like this that makes one think Ludwig might have been the greatest of 'em all although he wasn't as versatile as J.S. or Wolfgang. I'm fine with any of the usual candidates, really. I can also see Budge, Vines, Kramer, Lendl and the like up there. Again you're really betraying your (lack of) knowledge when you call Haydn the musical equivalent of Emerson. On the contrary Joseph tends to get underrated, because his ingenuity isn't so immediately obvious to dilettantes like you (and me for that matter) unlike Mozart's or (the more accessible) Beethoven's. For one thing no other composer has exploited silence to such a humorous effect as Haydn, which naturally is missed by most listeners who tend to pay attention to the notes or melodies rather than their absence, and how many or how fast or slow they're played. There's a reason why Haydn has been called the most inventive professional composer ever (Beethoven was the most innovative and influential). And it's rather ironic that you mention Bach, because by your own standard he'd fall clearly behind Haydn. J.S. was relatively conservative and didn't set out to invent new forms of music. He just took the existing forms and perfected them, granted probably better than anyone could within the limits of human faculty.