Best album ever?!

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="pianist"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

So is that the Orange Box of the music world (wonders who will get joke)?

Oh and if they ever release a complete Opeth collection then that will have some competition:P

Erasorn

:lol:

I got it. But frankly, it's a far better deal than the Orange Box.

And Opeth? We'll have to agree to disagree. If you're looking for compositional brilliance throughout an enormous output, no metal band compares to Brahms. The man wrote 4 symphonies, a requiem, 4 concertos, several collections of piano music, numerous choral works, and more than 300 art songs in addition to the aforementioned chamber music. One man, so much music for so many different combinations of instruments, and all of it of the very highest compositional caliber, from motivic development to contrapuntal ingenuity. Really tough to beat.

I said it would be some competition, not neccessarily better, lol.

Thing is Opeth has like 8 or 9 cd's out and they are coming out with a new one this year.

Unlike alot of bands they actually do a good job of FILLING UP THE CD with, funnily enough, LESS SONGS.

I think it says alot for a band when I am more than happy to fork over $15 for 5-6 songs. The length and brilliance of the songs simply makes it worth it.

Obviously Brahms has done alot more different stuff and despite Opeth's tendency to mix in lots of different influences and whatnot I am almost certain that Brahms will remain far superior in that matter.

However I simply LOVE Opeths stuff and think they are simply brilliant. They, like many classical composers, know how to make a long piece without it being boring and without throwing in tons of filler. I listen to Opeths song "Black Rose Immortal" and the 21 minutes just seems to fly by which is crazy.

Anyways, in terms of quantity, depending on how much longer Opeth continues, a full set of their stuff MIGHT include more music than the 12 cd collection you got. Now obviously QUALITY is a matter of taste, but quantity is not, albeit it most likely wouldn't sell for a mere $40....

It's amazing how much I like them considering I have major ADD and ADHD.....

[QUOTE="TheFlush"]I find these amaaaaaazing! *mass of picks*

are they all in a similar genre? becouse the only ones i know are 4hero, and if there all kinda similar im all over you choices like a randy dog

What is THE best album ever? From a value and quality point of view.

I say graduation from kanye west.

-RocBoys9489-

Yes!! Good morning

Anyways, in terms of quantity, depending on how much longer Opeth continues, a full set of their stuff MIGHT include more music than the 12 cd collection you got. Now obviously QUALITY is a matter of taste, but quantity is not, albeit it most likely wouldn't sell for a mere $40....

LostProphetFLCL

Ah, but to be fair, if you include Opeth's entire output, you'd have to include Brahms's entire output. I believe Brahms's complete output is a couple of solid days of playing time. :P

Complete chamber music (12 x 72 minutes = c. 864 minutes)

300+ lieder (rough average of 3 minutes per song = c. 900 minutes)

4 symphonies (rough average of 40 minutes each = 160 minutes)

4 concertos (same as symphonies)

Ein Deutsches Requiem (about 80 minutes)

That right there is 2164 minutes, or about 1 and a half days, and I haven't included any of the choral compositions, any of the solo piano music, the overtures, the orchestral variations or serenades, or the many other miscellaneous works in his output. I'm sure they would amount to no less than 1000 minutes, as he wrote a lot for choir and solo piano in particular.

It'd be interesting to know how much a person would have to pay for his complete works. Bach's complete works could be had for about 99 Euros last time I checked, but he wrote much more than Brahms - a staggering 155 CDs; like 11 THOUSAND minutes of playing time. And Mozart's complete works? 170 CDs. :o Not too shabby for a guy who only lived 35 years.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

Anyways, in terms of quantity, depending on how much longer Opeth continues, a full set of their stuff MIGHT include more music than the 12 cd collection you got. Now obviously QUALITY is a matter of taste, but quantity is not, albeit it most likely wouldn't sell for a mere $40....

pianist

Ah, but to be fair, if you include Opeth's entire output, you'd have to include Brahms's entire output. I believe Brahms's complete output is a couple of solid days of playing time. :P

Complete chamber music (12 x 72 minutes = c. 864 minutes)

300+ lieder (rough average of 3 minutes per song = c. 900 minutes)

4 symphonies (rough average of 40 minutes each = 160 minutes)

4 concertos (same as symphonies)

Ein Deutsches Requiem (about 80 minutes)

That right there is 2164 minutes, or about 1 and a half days, and I haven't included any of the choral compositions, any of the solo piano music, the overtures, the orchestral variations or serenades, or the many other miscellaneous works in his output. I'm sure they would amount to no less than 1000 minutes, as he wrote a lot for choir and solo piano in particular.

It'd be interesting to know how much a person would have to pay for his complete works. Bach's complete works could be had for about 99 Euros last time I checked, but he wrote much more than Brahms - a staggering 155 CDs; like 11 THOUSAND minutes of playing time. :o

You can get Brahms the masterworks which is 3/4 of his work, which the last time I checked was 100 pounds on Amazon. But I feel that is more to do with supply and demand. They are currently out of stock. I could have bought Bach's complete work for 60 pounds last month, but Amazon upped the price to around 90 pounds. I'm waiting 'till it decreases again or it is off to ebay.

We may aswell go all out...

And eh... *cough*

I'd say for me it's a tie between:

Minor Threat's Complete Discograpy

Black Flag's Damaged

Dead Kennedy's Fresh Fruit for Rotting Vegetables

AFI's Answer That and Stay Fashionable

Misfit's American Psycho

But everyone has their own best album ever, the above are what's considered best to me.

We may aswell go all out...

And eh... *cough*

Samwel_X

My favorite NIN album would have to be Pretty Hate Machine hand's down, closely followed by the Downward Spiral.

[QUOTE="Samwel_X"]

We may aswell go all out...

And eh... *cough*

AtomVamp308

My favorite NIN album would have to be Pretty Hate Machine hand's down, closely followed by the Downward Spiral.

Contradiction much?

You can get Brahms the masterworks which is 3/4 of his work, which the last time I checked was 100 pounds on Amazon. But I feel that is more to do with supply and demand. They are currently out of stock. I could have bought Bach's complete work for 60 pounds last month, but Amazon upped the price to around 90 pounds. I'm waiting 'till it decreases again or it is off to ebay.

Brutal_Elitegs

Considering the price of a modern album, 100 pounds is still a steal for what you're getting. One of the big advantages of being a fan of cIassical music is that all the composers have been dead so long that their music is in the public domain, so it can be sold much cheaper.

1. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, The Beatles is Rolling Stones Magazines' favorite album of all time.

But my personal favorite album is City of Evil by Avenged Sevenfold...i LOVE every song on there.....the only thing i dont like about the album is that there three biggest hits off the album were like the three worest songs on the CD(Beast and the Harlot, Seize the Day, and Bat Country)but they were still good songs

[QUOTE="Brutal_Elitegs"]

You can get Brahms the masterworks which is 3/4 of his work, which the last time I checked was 100 pounds on Amazon. But I feel that is more to do with supply and demand. They are currently out of stock. I could have bought Bach's complete work for 60 pounds last month, but Amazon upped the price to around 90 pounds. I'm waiting 'till it decreases again or it is off to ebay.

pianist

Considering the price of a modern album, 100 pounds is still a steal for what you're getting. One of the big advantages of being a fan of cIassical music is that all the composers have been dead so long that their music is in the public domain, so it can be sold much cheaper.

1. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, The Beatles is Rolling Stones Magazines' favorite album of all time.

OhComeOn_me

I love Sgt. Pepper's, but I think Abbey Road is a better Beatles Album. Someone was talking about classical music, my favorite piece of classical is Claude Debussy's Suite Bergamasque.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

Anyways, in terms of quantity, depending on how much longer Opeth continues, a full set of their stuff MIGHT include more music than the 12 cd collection you got. Now obviously QUALITY is a matter of taste, but quantity is not, albeit it most likely wouldn't sell for a mere $40....

pianist

Ah, but to be fair, if you include Opeth's entire output, you'd have to include Brahms's entire output. I believe Brahms's complete output is a couple of solid days of playing time. :P

Complete chamber music (12 x 72 minutes = c. 864 minutes)

300+ lieder (rough average of 3 minutes per song = c. 900 minutes)

4 symphonies (rough average of 40 minutes each = 160 minutes)

4 concertos (same as symphonies)

Ein Deutsches Requiem (about 80 minutes)

That right there is 2164 minutes, or about 1 and a half days, and I haven't included any of the choral compositions, any of the solo piano music, the overtures, the orchestral variations or serenades, or the many other miscellaneous works in his output. I'm sure they would amount to no less than 1000 minutes, as he wrote a lot for choir and solo piano in particular.

It'd be interesting to know how much a person would have to pay for his complete works. Bach's complete works could be had for about 99 Euros last time I checked, but he wrote much more than Brahms - a staggering 155 CDs; like 11 THOUSAND minutes of playing time. And Mozart's complete works? 170 CDs. :o Not too shabby for a guy who only lived 35 years.

LMAO point taken.

Did that man just write music every second he wasn't sleeping?

100 pounds is a steal (it's 2.50 for a CD (40 CDs for Brahms) and under a pound for a CD for Bach), but Chopins complete works goes for 40 pounds, so If I wait I can get Chopin and Bach for the same price as Bach's complete work goes for now. I really want to get it soon though incase they're discontinued.Brutal_Elitegs

Yeah, that would suck. It's listed as available, you decide to buy it that night, wake up the next morning, then get told it's discontinued. :lol:

[QUOTE="AtomVamp308"][QUOTE="Samwel_X"]

We may aswell go all out...

And eh... *cough*

bradleybhoy

My favorite NIN album would have to be Pretty Hate Machine hand's down, closely followed by the Downward Spiral.

Contradiction much?

Not at all, it's just that Pretty Hate Machine is the best NIN album and that their second best is the Downward Spiral.

LMAO point taken.

Did that man just write music every second he wasn't sleeping?

LostProphetFLCL

I think you could say that about Bach and Mozart, but although Brahms did compose a little every day (and encourages any aspiring composer to do the same), he certainly wasn't writing non-stop. Brahms was a merciless self critic and destroyed much of his work, which is a shame, because we could have learned much more about his process of writing.

Most people suspect he wrote like Beethoven, though... slow but steady progress day after day, reworking things over and over again. Not like Mozart who just wrote one piece after another with practically no re-working. Totally spontaneous, which is why he managed to write as much as he did. Schubert was the same way, and like Mozart, he died very young. They wrote themselves to death.

[QUOTE="Brutal_Elitegs"]100 pounds is a steal (it's 2.50 for a CD (40 CDs for Brahms) and under a pound for a CD for Bach), but Chopins complete works goes for 40 pounds, so If I wait I can get Chopin and Bach for the same price as Bach's complete work goes for now. I really want to get it soon though incase they're discontinued.pianist

Yeah, that would suck. It's listed as available, you decide to buy it that night, wake up the next morning, then get told it's discontinued. :lol:

A similar situation happened to the Bach complete. I am but a poor student and 60 pounds is a great deal of money to me, so I was hovering over the buy it now button, but decided not to since I did need to eat. A couple of weeks later when I got the money, the price has increased 50% :lol::cry:. I can always rely on ebay though to sell it me at 300% its original price if it is discontinued.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

LMAO point taken.

Did that man just write music every second he wasn't sleeping?

pianist

I think you could say that about Bach and Mozart, but although Brahms did compose a little every day (and encourages any aspiring composer to do the same), he certainly wasn't writing non-stop. Brahms was a merciless self critic and destroyed much of his work, which is a shame, because we could have learned much more about his process of writing.

Most people suspect he wrote like Beethoven, though... slow but steady progress day after day, reworking things over and over again. Not like Mozart who just wrote one piece after another with practically no re-working. Totally spontaneous, which is why he managed to write as much as he did. Schubert was the same way, and like Mozart, he died very young. They wrote themselves to death.

Are there any composers like this today? On the same level as Brahms, Mozart, Bach? Or is it even possible with people's inflated standards.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

So is that the Orange Box of the music world (wonders who will get joke)?

Oh and if they ever release a complete Opeth collection then that will have some competition:P

pianist

:lol:

I got it. But frankly, it's a far better deal than the Orange Box.

And Opeth? We'll have to agree to disagree. If you're looking for compositional brilliance throughout an enormous output, no metal band compares to Brahms. The man wrote 4 symphonies, a requiem, 4 concertos, several collections of piano music, numerous choral works, and more than 300 art songs in addition to the aforementioned chamber music. One man, so much music for so many different combinations of instruments, and all of it of the very highest compositional caliber, from motivic development to contrapuntal ingenuity. Really tough to beat.

[QUOTE="pianist"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

LMAO point taken.

Did that man just write music every second he wasn't sleeping?

SimpJee

I think you could say that about Bach and Mozart, but although Brahms did compose a little every day (and encourages any aspiring composer to do the same), he certainly wasn't writing non-stop. Brahms was a merciless self critic and destroyed much of his work, which is a shame, because we could have learned much more about his process of writing.

Most people suspect he wrote like Beethoven, though... slow but steady progress day after day, reworking things over and over again. Not like Mozart who just wrote one piece after another with practically no re-working. Totally spontaneous, which is why he managed to write as much as he did. Schubert was the same way, and like Mozart, he died very young. They wrote themselves to death.

Are there any composers like this today? On the same level as Brahms, Mozart, Bach? Or is it even possible with people's inflated standards.

Trent Renzor, trust me, the man is a GOD. verdugoRE4

Fixed :) :oops:

Are there any composers like this today? On the same level as Brahms, Mozart, Bach? Or is it even possible with people's inflated standards.

SimpJee

No, there aren't. Even the greats of the 20th century didn't produce nearly as much music. It's hard to put your finger on exactly what has changed, but I believe that it is primarily societal changes that have produced this effect on music. In the 19th century a composer needed to be writing a lot of music to live decently... and even ones who wrote a great deal (like Schubert) were often still very poor. Prior to that, the patronage system allowed composers to devote their entire lives to music. Haydn and Bach were both huge beneficiaries of that system, explaining their enormous outputs.

Nowadays, things are very different. You can be enormously wealthy with a much smaller output because of affordable mass media production, and so there isn't as much emphasis on composition. A band makes an album, then lives off of it for a very long time, playing the same songs over and over again in different locales, selling hundreds of thousands of CDs. They don't NEED to be composing a great deal, and I suppose they don't feel the burning desire to create that composers in earlier times did.

There's also a problem with acquiring recognition. There are still composers out there who are producing enormous outputs - hundreds of works - but their music never becomes popular amongst the masses. This is easily explainable. There is already a massive amount of exceptional cIassical music, and only a limited number of people interested in this sort of music, especially by comparison to more popular genres. If you have no market for your music, it doesn't matter how brilliant you are. You just aren't going to acquire a reputation. And so the composers who write like Brahms did are going to be forgotten. Maybe at some point in the future, someone will dig them up again. The one thing they have going for them is that music scholarship is far more developed now than it ever was in the past. Many composers we didn't even know existed until just recently are being dug up and studied, and performances of their music sponsored by the researching institutions. That's good news, because history has proven that it is easy for society to forget about great composers, especially if their music is not accessible on first listening. J.S. Bach almost fell victim to that fate, which is hard to believe given the reputation he has now amongst cIassical listeners.

what? no votes for -

the smiths - the queen is dead

the clash - london calling

joy division - unknown pleasures?

personally my favourite is oasis the masterplan

Back to Black

By: Amy Winehouse.

I think Aphex Twin may have produced the most music by himself of any other person ever (well over 100 hours of material that is mostly unreleased). He only puts out albums to make money, but he makes music because he loves it and spends an incredible amount of time on it, according to his interviews anyway.
quiglythegreat

100 x 60 minutes = 6000 minutes. How old is he? If he's not yet 35, he could surpass Mozart. If hes' older... let's just say Mozart wrote roughly 12 000 minutes of music in the 35 years he lived. Bach came close at about 11 000 minutes, but lived longer. I'd have to check on Schubert and Wagner. It's tough to imagine they would beat out Mozart, but you never know.

[QUOTE="verdugoRE4"] Trent Renzor, trust me, the man is a GOD. Samwel_X

Fixed :) :oops:

no he's a man

[QUOTE="verdugoRE4"] Trent Reznor, trust me, the man is a GOD. Samwel_X

Fixed :) :oops:

I'M SO DISAPPOINTED IN YOU!

Now it's fixed

Mike Patton is better then Mozart

Mozart could never sing like Mike

Trent Renzor, trust me, the man is a genius. verdugoRE4

:lol:

I'm not sure you understand the scope of Brahms's work... if you think Renzor compares, kindly tell me how.

[QUOTE="Samwel_X"]

[QUOTE="verdugoRE4"] Trent Reznor, trust me, the man is a GOD. niptuckSean

Fixed :) :oops:

I'M SO DISAPPOINTED IN YOU!

Now it's fixed

I only read the genius part :P

It's like when your eyes skim over and the first and last letters are correct...

[QUOTE="verdugoRE4"]Trent Renzor, trust me, the man is a genius. pianist

:lol:

I'm not sure you understand the scope of Brahms's work... if you think Renzor compares, kindly tell me how.

In terms of influence and pushing musical styles very much so. Innovation is very much on Reznor's side, obviously it is hard to compare classical composers with modern day music, but if anyone is comparable in that respect it is him.

Mike Patton is better then Mozart

Mozart could never sing like Mike

Norg

And Patton could never compose or play piano like Mozart. Your point? Also Fischer-Dieskau >>>>>>>>> any popular music singer.

[QUOTE="SimpJee"]

Are there any composers like this today? On the same level as Brahms, Mozart, Bach? Or is it even possible with people's inflated standards.

pianist

No, there aren't. Even the greats of the 20th century didn't produce nearly as much music. It's hard to put your finger on exactly what has changed, but I believe that it is primarily societal changes that have produced this effect on music. In the 19th century a composer needed to be writing a lot of music to live decently... and even ones who wrote a great deal (like Schubert) were often still very poor. Prior to that, the patronage system allowed composers to devote their entire lives to music. Haydn and Bach were both huge beneficiaries of that system, explaining their enormous outputs.

Nowadays, things are very different. You can be enormously wealthy with a much smaller output because of affordable mass media production, and so there isn't as much emphasis on composition. A band makes an album, then lives off of it for a very long time, playing the same songs over and over again in different locales, selling hundreds of thousands of CDs. They don't NEED to be composing a great deal, and I suppose they don't feel the burning desire to create that composers in earlier times did.

There's also a problem with acquiring recognition. There are still composers out there who are producing enormous outputs - hundreds of works - but their music never becomes popular amongst the masses. This is easily explainable. There is already a massive amount of exceptional cIassical music, and only a limited number of people interested in this sort of music, especially by comparison to more popular genres. If you have no market for your music, it doesn't matter how brilliant you are. You just aren't going to acquire a reputation. And so the composers who write like Brahms did are going to be forgotten. Maybe at some point in the future, someone will dig them up again. The one thing they have going for them is that music scholarship is far more developed now than it ever was in the past. Many composers we didn't even know existed until just recently are being dug up and studied, and performances of their music sponsored by the researching institutions. That's good news, because history has proven that it is easy for society to forget about great composers, especially if their music is not accessible on first listening. J.S. Bach almost fell victim to that fate, which is hard to believe given the reputation he has now amongst cIassical listeners.

What about the MUSIC though, are there modern composers who are writing BETTER music than Brahms, Mozart, and Bach?

You can put whatever definition you want on better, I just mean it as ... everything :P

[QUOTE="verdugoRE4"]Trent Renzor, trust me, the man is a genius. pianist

:lol:

I'm not sure you understand the scope of Brahms's work... if you think Renzor compares, kindly tell me how.

becasue brahms never made killer Songs like this :P

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qXVX2zzHxeg

becasue brahms never made killer Songs like this :P

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qXVX2zzHxeg

Norg

Aaron is sloppier than usual on that guitar... bad video :P

[QUOTE="Norg"]

becasue brahms never made killer Songs like this :P

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qXVX2zzHxeg

Samwel_X

Aaron is sloppier than usual on that guitar... bad video :P

Do you like Skinny Puppy Samwel?

[QUOTE="Norg"]

Mike Patton is better then Mozart

Mozart could never sing like Mike

pianist

And Patton could never compose or play piano like Mozart. Your point? Also Fischer-Dieskau >>>>>>>>> any popular music singer.

that fat guy was a one trick pony he could never sing scream rap whisper and make noises like Patton does

besides Patton can sing just like that with ease

[QUOTE="Samwel_X"]

[QUOTE="verdugoRE4"] Trent Renzor, trust me, the man is a GOD. mingo123

Fixed :) :oops:

no he's a man

[QUOTE="Samwel_X"]

[QUOTE="verdugoRE4"] Trent Reznor, trust me, the man is a GOD. niptuckSean

Fixed :) :oops:

I'M SO DISAPPOINTED IN YOU!

Now it's fixed

Do you like Skinny Puppy Samwel?

SimpJee

Yeah... well, before the come back. Too Dark Park is the best album... closely followed by Last Rights...

[QUOTE="SimpJee"]

Do you like Skinny Puppy Samwel?

Samwel_X

Yeah... well, before the come back. Too Dark Park is the best album... closely followed by Last Rights...

Agreed. How can you like NIN after hearing the awesomeness that is Skinny Puppy :P Anything else is just deluded electro-industrial.

[QUOTE="pianist"][QUOTE="Norg"]

Mike Patton is better then Mozart

Mozart could never sing like Mike

Norg

And Patton could never compose or play piano like Mozart. Your point? Also Fischer-Dieskau >>>>>>>>> any popular music singer.

that fat guy was a one trick pony he could never sing scream rap whisper and make noises like Patton does

besides Patton can sing just like that with ease

Bjork > Mozart > Patton

end of

Agreed. How can you like NIN after hearing the awesomeness that is Skinny Puppy :P Anything else is just deluded electro-industrial.

SimpJee

I can like NIN... remember, calling NIN industrial is a very narrow view of Nine Inch Nails... far more styles are covered. :)

[QUOTE="Norg"][QUOTE="pianist"][QUOTE="Norg"]

Mike Patton is better then Mozart

Mozart could never sing like Mike

bradleybhoy

And Patton could never compose or play piano like Mozart. Your point? Also Fischer-Dieskau >>>>>>>>> any popular music singer.

that fat guy was a one trick pony he could never sing scream rap whisper and make noises like Patton does

besides Patton can sing just like that with ease

Bjork > Mozart > Patton

end of

no end of story

Bjork is a nursery rhyme singer and a crazy women shes not better then Patton

her voice on some songs puts me to sleep

and i dont even think mozart sing in his songs

[QUOTE="bradleybhoy"][QUOTE="Norg"][QUOTE="pianist"][QUOTE="Norg"]

Mike Patton is better then Mozart

Mozart could never sing like Mike

Norg

And Patton could never compose or play piano like Mozart. Your point? Also Fischer-Dieskau >>>>>>>>> any popular music singer.

that fat guy was a one trick pony he could never sing scream rap whisper and make noises like Patton does

besides Patton can sing just like that with ease

Bjork > Mozart > Patton

end of

no end of story

Bjork is a nursery rhyme singer and a crazy women shes not better then Patton

her voice on some songs puts me to sleep

Oh sorry I meant to write "end of sarcasm". :D

In terms of influence and pushing musical styles very much so. Innovation is very much on Reznor's side, obviously it is hard to compare classical composers with modern day music, but if anyone is comparable in that respect it is him.

Samwel_X

It is indeed difficult to compare, because especially when it comes to harmony and form, you'd be surprised by how many 'new' ideas in rock music have already been used in cIassical music. Even the use of electronic aspects of music, so often thought to have been pioneered by rock music, was actually spearheaded by cIassical composers around the middle of the 20th century, though it never gained much prominence.

That's not to say Reznor isn't creative... but he's probably not as innovative as most give him credit for if you're talking about the larger context of Western music development. Studying a bit of 20th century cIassical music (the real stuff, not film scores and such) can give you a bit of an appreciation of how much ground has been covered. As for Brahms, he was more of a synthesizer than an innovator. He didn't invent new ways of writing music, but rather took what was exceptional about music from the past and synthesized it into his own personal style, writing with great skill.

Frankly, it's hard to do anything that is truly new in tonal music anymore, especially when you're writing within the relatively narrow formal confines of popular music harmony and rhythm. Pushing the envelope for rock music isn't necessarily pushing the envelope for music in general.