Whats your top 10 of all time right now?

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Schumann must have heard bad performances.
Again, listen to Karajan with Wunderlich in the Creation, both studio and live, and then tell me that you hear no emotion. Wunderlich was the Haydn singer of them all.
Or Gould in the sonatas.
Furtwangler in symphony 88 (Furtwangler was never dull), or Bernstein in the symphonies (always had passion and a range of emotions).
As an Austrian, you must appreciate these performers.
And get a hold of Philip Downs' book "Classical Music" for an understanding of Haydn's life and compositional approach.

Dan, I appreciated those performers but I just can't appreciate Haydn's ice-cold music, a music without any deeper emotions.....

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Some good observations, although Mozart himself learned a lot from Haydn and this was a positive influence, put some more muscle into Mozart (like the Prague and Jupiter symphonies).

Dan, It was just reverse: Haydn who wrote only second class symphonies before he learnt Mozart's masterpieces learnt a lot from them. Without Mozart even the latest Haydn oeuvres would have stayed totally dull.

I only accept No.94 and some string quartetts plus Die Schöpfung (The Creation).

[kiki]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Phoenix, Gimeno did beat Rosewall in four majors.

Gimeno, Gonzalez, Anderson, Buchholz and Ralston showed in open era how strong they still were.

Take off journeyman Bucholz and add Cooper and of course Olmedo

[kiki]

Kramer,Newk,Emmo,Edberg,Mac,Sedgmam,Hoad,,Rosewall ,Cochet and Trabert for singles&dubs

[pc1]

Originally Posted by kiki

Kramer,Newk,Emmo,Edberg,Mac,Sedgmam,Hoad,,Rosewall ,Cochet and Trabert for singles&dubs

Kiki,

Since you mentioned Trabert, I was trying to find a relatively current equivalent in style and in relative strength to Trabert. Trabert was a terrific baseliner with an excellent return as well as a very good serve and volleyer. He was not the most agile however. I thought of a couple, one is Agassi for the return and groundies. Agassi wasn't exactly fast either. The second is Boris Becker. The problem I have with Becker is that Becker wasn't that good on clay, having never won a clay tournament. Becker had a better serve imo but Trabert's was pretty goo.

My questions are this, how strong would you say Trabert was at his peak? I think he was excellent. Second, who do you think is a relatively close equivalent to Trabert in the last twenty to thirty years?

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Dan, It was just reverse: Haydn who wrote only second class symphonies before he learnt Mozart's masterpieces learnt a lot from them. Without Mozart even the latest Haydn oeuvres would have stayed totally dull.

I only accept No. 94 and some string quartets plus Die Schöpfung (The Creation).

Too bad. Symphony no. 92 or no. 88 are more interesting.

[urban]

PC 1, those equivalents of different eras are quite fascinating. I would compare Becker to Hoad in some ways (i remember Maskell saying something like that, when Becker played a junior final with Edberg), Sampras to Gonzalez (big weapon serve), Edberg to Patty (both had fine backhand volleys), Korda or Leconte to Laver (fine lefty backhands), Pernfors reminded me of Rosewall (i know double hander). From what i have read, Trabert was a hard working pro, great on clay, a bit like Courier, although Traberts backhand was his strong side.

[Phoenix1983]

Would it be true to say Rosewall, Connors and Agassi are equivalents from their respective eras?

[Dan Lobb]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Dan, I appreciated those performers but I just can't appreciate Haydn's ice-cold music, a music without any deeper emotions.....

"Deeper emotions"? If you listen to Furtwangler or Karajan conduct Haydn, you will hear not only emotions, but a profound spirituality, something more significant than mere emotions. The greatest composers attempted to reveal spitiyual realities, this was true not just of Bach and Handel, but also Haydn (the Masses, Creation, the Seasons, Seven Last Words of Christ), Mozart (Requiem, Mass in C Minor, Zauberflote, other sacred works).
Did you know that Mozart accepted a position as church composer just before his death?
Beethoven wrote two great spiritual edifices, the Missa Solemnis and Ninth Symphony, as the culmination of his work.

[Dan Lobb]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Dan, It was just reverse: Haydn who wrote only second class symphonies before he learnt Mozart's masterpieces learnt a lot from them. Without Mozart even the latest Haydn oeuvres would have stayed totally dull.

I only accept No.94 and some string quartetts plus Die Schöpfung (The Creation).

Mozart was not a symphonist primarily, unike Haydn, and Mozart's maturity as symphonist came in 1786 (the Prague), the same year that Haydn was already through composing the great Paris symphonies.

[Dan Lobb]

Originally Posted by urban

PC 1, those equivalents of different eras are quite fascinating. I would compare Becker to Hoad in some ways (i remember Maskell saying something like that, when Becker played a junior final with Edberg), Sampras to Gonzalez (big weapon serve), Edberg to Patty (both had fine backhand volleys), Korda or Leconte to Laver (fine lefty backhands), Pernfors reminded me of Rosewall (i know double hander). From what i have read, Trabert was a hard working pro, great on clay, a bit like Courier, although Traberts backhand was his strong side.

Trabert had powerful groundstrokes, which were consistent enough to win four Roland Garros titles.
Trabert was similar to Becker, although Becker could not play clay.
Hoad was much faster and more agile than Becker, and had the ability to win on clay. A much greater range of weapons than Becker.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Mozart was not a symphonist primarily, unike Haydn, and Mozart's maturity as symphonist came in 1786 (the Prague), the same year that Haydn was already through composing the great Paris symphonies.

Dan, listen objectively to both and you will realize the difference between great music (Mozart) and well-composed music (Haydn).

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

"Deeper emotions"? If you listen to Furtwangler or Karajan conduct Haydn, you will hear not only emotions, but a profound spirituality, something more significant than mere emotions. The greatest composers attempted to reveal spitiyual realities, this was true not just of Bach and Handel, but also Haydn (the Masses, Creation, the Seasons, Seven Last Words of Christ), Mozart (Requiem, Mass in C Minor, Zauberflote, other sacred works).
Did you know that Mozart accepted a position as church composer just before his death?
Beethoven wrote two great spiritual edifices, the Missa Solemnis and Ninth Symphony, as the culmination of his work.

Dan, I did not know it.

I would like to add Schubert's last mass (in German words it's in Es-Dur).

Of course we may not forget Bach's great Passions and his "High Mass".

[pc1]

Originally Posted by urban

PC 1, those equivalents of different eras are quite fascinating. I would compare Becker to Hoad in some ways (i remember Maskell saying something like that, when Becker played a junior final with Edberg), Sampras to Gonzalez (big weapon serve), Edberg to Patty (both had fine backhand volleys), Korda or Leconte to Laver (fine lefty backhands), Pernfors reminded me of Rosewall (i know double hander). From what i have read, Trabert was a hard working pro, great on clay, a bit like Courier, although Traberts backhand was his strong side.

Originally Posted by Dan Lobb

Trabert had powerful groundstrokes, which were consistent enough to win four Roland Garros titles.
Trabert was similar to Becker, although Becker could not play clay.
Hoad was much faster and more agile than Becker, and had the ability to win on clay. A much greater range of weapons than Becker.

Becker is the closest comp to Trabert I know of. Thanks to both of you for your replies.

Urban I've often thought Korda and Leconte were similar to many ways to Laver. Laver of course was more consistent than either but all of them could hit streaks where they seemed unstoppable.

I would agree with both of you that Hoad was similar to Becker but as Dan wrote, had many more weapons.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by Phoenix1983

Would it be true to say Rosewall, Connors and Agassi are equivalents from their respective eras?

Phoenix,

Yes, all of them were tops in backhand, return and they took the ball early.

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Dan, It was just reverse: Haydn who wrote only second class symphonies before he learnt Mozart's masterpieces learnt a lot from them. Without Mozart even the latest Haydn oeuvres would have stayed totally dull.

Boy, have you got your history and chronology mixed up.

Haydn started writing his emotional Sturm und Drang symphonies (nos. 43-48 ) around 1772. Mozart was 16 at the time, and his output had extended to K. 150s and 160s. Mozart's symphonies of this time went up through no. 22, K. 162--years away from and hardly as noteworthy as his much more mature 1786 Prague Symphony no. 38, K. 504.

Haydn's rather advanced Paris Symphonies (nos. 82-87) were written 1786-87, when Mozart was finally reaching musical maturity with Koechel numbers in the late 480s-early 500s.

Mozart very much admired and respected Haydn. Why else would he have dedicated his greatest String Quartets nos 14-19 to the elder master. (They are now universally referred to as Mozart's Haydn Quartets, from 1782-85.)

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

Boy, have you got your history and chronology mixed up.

Old fellow, I'm quite sure about the right chronology. Haydn composed his best worksonly AFTER Mozart's death.

Haydn's middle age symphonies are much weaker than his last ones, influenced by Mozart's masterpieces.

Mozart made a genial symphony as early as 1773, his fabulous Little g-Minor, much sooner than Haydn's relative great ones.

Mozart and Haydn respected each other. Mozart's Haydn-Quartetts outclass Haydn's quartetts.

Beethoven dedicated works to Haydn but he did not admire Haydn. A dedication does not mean too much.

I guess we should return now to returns, services and similary items.

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Old fellow, I'm quite sure about the right chronology. Haydn composed his best works only AFTER Mozart's death.

Haydn's middle age symphonies are much weaker than his last ones, influenced by Mozart's masterpieces.

Mozart made a genial symphonie as early as 1773, his fabulous Little g-Minor, much sooner than Haydn's relative great ones.

Mozart and Haydn respected each other. Mozart's Haydn-Quartetts outclass Haydn's quartetts.

Beethoven dedicated works to Haydn but he did not admire Haydn. A dedication does not mean too much.

I guess we should return now to returns, services and similary items.

Wrong again, ole bean.

Mozart died 5 December 1791. Haydn went to London in January of 1791, whereupon he started writing the first of his culminating London Symphonies (nos. 93-104). The earliest of which (numbered incorrectly as no. 96) premiered in London in March 1791.

Mozart's Symphony no. 25 in G minor, K. 183 is fairly pleasant and genial, but if you want to hear "feelings" and emotions from an early Classical period work try Haydn's symphonies no. 43 Mercury or no. 44 Trauersymphonie written in 1772 one year before Mozart's "genial" symphony no. 25.

The facts deny many of your statements, and the chronology contradicts many of your unfounded assertions.

[forzamilan90]

[Phoenix1983]

I didn't realise this thread was ranking the top ten composers of all time