
Can any composer equal Bach? - aphextron
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20140917-can-any-composer-equal-bach
======
stochastic_monk
A careful analysis of Beethoven's later works shows him to be a worthy
contender.

In particular, the Große Fugue [0] and the Op. 106 Hammerklavier sonata [1]
(ironically so nicknamed, because at Op. 101, Beethoven directed that all
sonatas from that time on be named Große Sonate für das Hammerklavier, and the
nickname only stuck to this) show a profoundly advanced sense of counterpoint
and structure. In addition to applying all of the classical transformations to
motifs (including augmentation, diminution, cancrizans, canons and sequences),
he even performs note for note reversals in time. (A temporal cancrizan, if
you will.) [Edit: it would be a crime to fail to mention the late string
quartets, which show prescience of modernism and are considered to be the
pinnacle of chamber music. Many of you will at least be familiar with the Op.
131 c# minor quartet, which Wagner called the "saddest music ever penned" and
whose 6th movement was used in the Band of Brothers episode "Why We Fight".]

Similarly, Brahms' masterful applications of form and counterpoint put most
other composers to shame. Rather than be as enormously prolific as Bach, the
quality of his output is more consistently excellent. (No doubt partially due
to his penchant for burning the manuscripts which he felt were subpar.)

I think it's a little unfair to put Bach on this pedestal. There's plenty of
music by any composer mentioned to relax to or feel stimulated by.
Additionally, Bach's musical temperaments are somewhat limited by his media
and styles. He is the master of his craft, but his craft has limited scope.

Yes, Bach has his own, unique, immovable place. But Beethoven, Brahms, and
many other composers have immutable, unchallenged championships in their own
arenas.

[P.S. Please mark this with a [2014] tag to denote when it was published.]

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gro%C3%9Fe_Fuge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gro%C3%9Fe_Fuge)

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piano_Sonata_No._29_(Beethoven...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piano_Sonata_No._29_\(Beethoven\))

~~~
Bud
I think Bach's scope is much, much larger than most listeners are aware. For
instance, most are completely unaware of the Bach cantata repertoire, the
guitar/lute repertoire, etc. I don't mean you personally, because I of course
do not know what you're familiar with.

(personal bias: I sing professionally, and a fairly large part of what I sing
is Bach.)

~~~
username223
The lute suites are crazy. He didn't play the lute, modern guitars didn't
exist when he wrote them, the pieces aren't playable on a guitar without some
changes, they sound amazing, and they are brutal to even approximate. He wrote
many-voiced ("polyphonic") music for an instrument played by beating two hands
on six strings. Not content with that, he wrote _fugues_ for the same
instrument, which are polyphonic music that obeys a lot of rules.

Take the time to learn the rules of fugues, then try to understand one of
Bach's.

~~~
bratsche
Incidentally one of his lute suites is the same as the c minor cello suite.
Except I think on lute it's in either a or e minor, I forget now. I don't know
whether the cello suite came first or the lute suite though.

But as a violist I found this interesting. I like to play his violin sonatas
and partitas but on viola but people have discouraged me from this because it
means changing the key and everyone insists that Bach is _very_ deliberate in
his choice of key and it's almost blasphemy to think about playing his music
in a different key. But the lute/cello suite is a direct contradiction to
this.

~~~
username223
G minor, I believe. I personally think it works better on the guitar, and
can't imagine trying to do justice to polyphonic music on an instrument where
it seems hard to play more than one string at a time. Sort of like the
Paganini caprices -- I first heard them played by Eliot Fisk on the guitar,
and even if he is sloppy sometimes, it sounds better than any violin recording
I've heard.

~~~
bratsche
I found the one I'm talking about on Apple Music, John Williams playing them
on guitar. It's BWV 995 for lute, and it is in a minor.

fwiw on cello it's BWV 1011.

~~~
username223
I'll check it out, since Williams is a great guitarist. I have a couple of
recordings of BWV 995 at hand, and they both claim to be in G minor.

~~~
bratsche
Oh, interesting! Perhaps Bach wrote it for lute in g minor and Williams plays
it in a minor on guitar? I didn't think of that.

Wikipedia seems to agree with you on the key:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suite_in_G_minor,_BWV_995](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suite_in_G_minor,_BWV_995)

~~~
username223
It's not uncommon to retune a guitar for some pieces, often making the lowest
string D instead of E. I don't think that was true for this piece, but I don't
have the sheet music, and it has been awhile. It's worth remembering that the
guitar is a relatively young instrument.

------
IAmGraydon
Douglas Adams once said "Beethoven tells you what it's like to be Beethoven
and Mozart tells you what it's like to be human. Bach tells you what it's like
to be the universe."

As a musician, I understand this. It's our goal as musicians to channel and
convey emotion. Bach channels something much greater than himself or myself or
ourselves. It's really incredible. His music sounds vast.

~~~
_emacsomancer_
Adams also wrote: "The familiarity of the Brandenburgs should not blind us to
their magnitude. I’m convinced that Bach is the greater genius who ever walked
among us, and the Brandenburgs are what he wrote when he was happy."

------
aimeric
Since we're on this topic: Is Western classical music (typified by Bach)
really the zenith in our human understanding of the 'universal' language of
music?

Certainly, the complex and subtle tunes and harmonies of classical, in
particular, give us goosebumps, provoke intense emotional responses. Do the
same phenomena occur in other musical cultures? Traditional Japanese, Chinese,
Javanese, Indian - their musical expression is markedly different. Try out
some ancient Greek scales, from the dawn of our Western civilization:
unfamiliar, yet still 'tingly'.

So are there equivalents to Bach that we're just not 'in tune' with?
Alternative musical structures that are just as valid, yet wildly unfamiliar?

Akira - Kaneda's Theme:
[https://youtu.be/hpDvtIt6Lsc](https://youtu.be/hpDvtIt6Lsc)

Indonesian Gamelan orchestra:
[https://youtu.be/sZZTfu4jWcI](https://youtu.be/sZZTfu4jWcI)

What Ancient Greek Music Sounded Like:
[https://soundcloud.com/archaeologymag/what-ancient-greek-
mus...](https://soundcloud.com/archaeologymag/what-ancient-greek-music)

Ancient Krell Music (Forbidden Planet, 1956):
[https://youtu.be/oNKhju6Pryg](https://youtu.be/oNKhju6Pryg)

~~~
niftilyeerily
Indian Classical Music is perhaps the most versatile of all kinds of music I
have come across. A traditional western scale has 12 notes, in the Indian
system (carnatic) there are four further divisions, making it a 48 note
octave. Instead of scales, there are raags and they signify different moods.

Indian Flute Meditation Music:
[https://youtu.be/mr8GBzTsWqM](https://youtu.be/mr8GBzTsWqM)

~~~
tacomonstrous
>48 note octave

That's somewhat of an exaggeration. There are embellishments of notes that
border half and quarter-notes, but they are usually centered around a point on
the 12 note octave.

Also, there is a price to be paid for the melodic complexity: there is
essentially no place for harmony in the Indian tradition. On the other hand,
there is a lot more room for improvisation, making it more akin to Jazz than
to any Western classical form.

------
DubiousPusher
I first should admit that I'm a 100% self taught appreciator of classical
music. I don't have any formal musical education. Nor any formal history of
music education. I'm the only person of my family and friends that seeks out
and listens to classical music. So, my knowledge is very uneven and I'm a
total pedestrian in this realm. Over the years, I've found music by references
from fiction, films and criticism. I've run down many a list of "great
composers". Usually, some little reference throws me down a rabbit hole of all
kind of new compositions I like but every time I get to Bach, I stop short. I
just can't stand the music. I've spent hours picking different recordings of
the Brandenburg's, the Toccatas and Fantasias to no avail. I understand the
music is important historically and that it has a technical beauty but it just
doesn't move me in any way. Maybe some day it will click but until then I'm
just going to have to take the critic's word for it.

~~~
lobster_johnson
Those pieces you mention aren't exactly the things I would categorize as
"moving", though.

What about the pieces for solo cello (BWV 1007-1008)? The Goldberg Variations?
The solo violin sonatas (BWV 1001-1006)? His motets (e.g. BWV 227) and
cantatas (too many to mention)? Or the Matthäus Passion (BWV 244)? Most people
would also mention the Orchestral Suite No. 3 in D major (BWV 1068, more
famously known as "Air on the G string"). Then, for sheer awesomeness, his
Mass in B Minor (BWV 232) is hard to beat.

That said, aside from some of the above pieces, Bach is often too dense,
complex and (heh) baroque to be truly _moving_. The beauty of many of his
pieces are in their construction, not in their ability to give you goosebumps.

~~~
jly
I still remember where I was when I first time I saw the piano partitas (BWV
825-830) performed. Gould playing the one in C minor moves me about as much as
any music, along with some of the others you mentioned.

Bach's compositions are unquestionably beautiful and technically brilliant,
but not all of his music was written to stir an audience. He composed in a
different time and for different reasons than the classical composers that
came after him.

~~~
sigil
“The purpose of art is not the release of a momentary ejection of adrenaline
but rather the gradual, lifelong construction of a state of wonder and
serenity.”

― Glenn Gould

------
jancsika
> It’s inconceivable that another composer could take Bach’s place in that
> slot. Even Mozart or Beethoven wouldn’t cut it.

I'd pick Mozart.

When listeners hear Bach enumerate what seems like every significant variation
technique for a given theme, they can quickly attribute mastery upon hearing
that one piece.

But someone with Bach's abilities could just as easily have only _imagined_
all those variations as _potential_ music, then chosen only a few excerpts for
a lighter, shorter setting.

Now, imagine this alternative-timeline Bach wrote in a late 18th century
operatic form. For each aria he a) picks a fitting style (or mashes up
fitting/effective styles), b) imagines the set of possible music based on the
character of the text, and c) chooses what he thinks is the most fitting from
all those possibilities. (Also, throw in a bunch of hidden musical jokes along
the way.)

That alternative-timeline Bach would be superior to the real Bach. Because he
came _after_ the real Bach his output includes real Bach's mastery of
counterpoint (Jupiter Symphony, Intro to Requiem). Also alternative-timeline
Bach can imitate real Bach's style at will (two-part invention at the end of
Rondo in A minor).

The only difficulty is that the listener has to listen to a lot of
alternative-timeline Bach before they start to get a sense of the scope of his
mastery.

Well, good thing the slot we're trying to fill gives an audience plenty of
time to hear a variety of music from this composer's output.

Bach++ ftw.

~~~
asaph
> It’s inconceivable that another composer could take Bach’s place...

I'd like to put my vote in for Lennon-McCartney.

I know we're talking about classical music here and I'm not trolling. I just
think they're the toppermost of the poppermost.

~~~
jancsika
There's definitely a lot of innovation with them, and not just in songwriting.
For example, I can't figure why Helter Skelter has somehow managed to sound
like it was recorded yesterday for five decades now. How many other recordings
from 1968 sound like that?

But I can imagine a world where an alternate Lennon-McCartney arranged all
their own string parts, dominated the symphonic world, wrote wildly popular
church service music, performed guitar showcase music with prominent (probably
improvised) cadenzas, and had multiple hits running on Broadway.

I think you could pick any single genre, burn everything else Mozart wrote,
and he'd still be regarded as one of the greatest composers of his time. (That
doesn't work for Beethoven because of the opera genre.)

Rich people at parties are _still_ playing the throw-away background music he
probably wrote for a rich person's party. (Btw-- if you listen to the rest of
his background music you won't be disappointed.)

------
te0006
If you can name a short (<5 mins) piece of music more beautiful, moving but
also all-encompassing than Bach's "Air on a G-String" please do so; I can't.
Listen to this interpretation before deciding:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cVSgEdT4KI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cVSgEdT4KI)
. Love, loss, despair, grievance, new hope, closure - it's all in there in
this single, short, compassionate-but-not-sentimental, solemn-but-not-sad,
perfectly balanced, ethereal piece.

~~~
MrJagil
Been loving this lately
[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eGybwV3U9W8](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eGybwV3U9W8)

~~~
jacquesm
Thank you both those are beautiful.

~~~
mercer
Seriously! This is making my Saturday even better than I hoped it would be.

I often forget properly _listening_ , and instead end up having the same bunch
of Spotify songs on repeat throughout the week. For all the suggestions in
this thread I even dusted off my 'really good but uncomfortable' headphones
:).

------
gshubert17
Early in Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon, a math teacher and organist explains
to Lawrence Waterhouse how organs worked.

"When Lawrence understood, it was as if the math teacher had suddenly played
the good part of Bach's Fantasia and Fugue in G Minor [BWV 542] on a pipe
organ the size of the Spiral Nebula in Andromeda—the part where Uncle Johann
dissects the architecture of the Universe in one merciless escending ever-
mutating chord, as if his foot is thrusting through skidding layers of garbage
until it finally strikes bedrock. In particular, the final steps of the
organist's explanation were like a falcon's dive through layer after layer of
pretense and illusion, thrilling or sickening or confusing depending on what
you were. The heavens were riven open. Lawrence glimpsed choirs of angels
ranking off into geometrical infinity."

------
wizardforhire
The Chaconne [1] is the most moving piece of music I've ever heard. (hard
stop)

The story behind it makes it even more so. When you grok it at full volume
you'll understand what Douglas Adams was talking about.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaconne](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaconne)

~~~
ibz
Helene Grimaud's interpretation [1] of Busoni's transcription for piano is
also pretty amazing.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw9DlMNnpPM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw9DlMNnpPM)

~~~
jacquesm
That gives me gooseflesh. Thank you for this.

------
whack
Ironically enough, I think the author did a fantastic job of demonstrating why
"writing about music" is a fool's game. I love Bach as well, but what makes
him the "ultimate", beyond reach of others like Mozart? The article paints
numerous glowing tributes by Bach's fans, presents the inspiration of his
life, but fails utterly in answering the ultimate question.

I've always believed that art is qualitatively different from pop
entertainment. The latter is purely subjective, and aims to pleasure us. Art,
in contrast, is defined by its ability to inspire its audience. Its ability to
elevate the way we think, act, and look upon the world.

Which is more tasty, chocolate or oranges? That's an impossible question to
answer in any objective manner. But which is more nutritious? Which is better
for our health? That is something which can be quantified and discussed much
more objectively. I look forward to the day we can have similar discussions
about art.

~~~
sotojuan
> The latter is purely subjective, and aims to pleasure us.

A lot of composers of the Classical era such as Haydn would gladly say their
music is made for the pleasure of all or as many people as possible ("I write
my music in order that the weary and worn or the men burdened with affairs
might enjoy a few minutes of solace and refreshment."). In fact, I would argue
the whole point of the Classical style of the late 1700s was to move away from
(in their words) "elitist" and complicated music of Bach and the opera seria,
Mozart's operas being much easier to relate to as an average Joe than
Monteverdi's. Yet all their works are inspiring and elevating - I think both
goals can be achieved.

------
8bitsrule
Bach is the 'ultimate composer' in the same sense that Pleistocene Ogg is the
ultimate tool-maker, Robert Goddard the ultimate rocket-maker.

Bach did many wondrous things, added a lot to the vocabulary, staked a viable
claim on a couple of mother lodes. But this sort of argument (though eternally
engaged in) is futile. While classical is a favorite of many (including me),
music has moved far, far onward.

~~~
archagon
Onward, but not forward. Counterpoint is still depressingly underused in
modern music (save for the occasional duet), and it can say so much with so
little material. (Heck, the majority modern music barely even changes _chords_
, let let alone key or anything beyond.) These tools are not antiquated; they
are not buried in the sediment. They are still perfectly useful and there for
our taking, if only we would dust them off.

~~~
qiqitori
If by counterpoint you mean having melody on a different track (rather than
just "beat" or added harmony) I'd say it's used way more than just in
duets/canons. Most jazz (or accompaniment in general) would apply for example.

[https://youtu.be/GhCXAiNz9Jo?t=1m22s](https://youtu.be/GhCXAiNz9Jo?t=1m22s)
Does this apply? (Franz Ferdinand - Take Me Out)

I think counterpoint is used more than people think.

Saying that we haven't moved "forward" from Bach is disingenuous, when Bach
didn't even have straight 7th chords.

~~~
archagon
I'd say counterpoint requires the melodies to be on more-or-less equal
footing, which doesn't really happen in this clip. (I'm sure it happens way
more often in jazz, but I'm not an avid listener.) In any case, you definitely
won't be hearing the kinds of crazy thematic transformations that Bach uses in
his fugues.

I didn't mean to imply that our music is unequivocally less advanced than
Bach's — we've certainly acquired musical tools over the years that Bach would
never have dreamed of! — but I also don't believe that his music should be
viewed as a mere archeological layer in music history. It's still alive, it
still resonates with modern audiences, and it still uses techniques that are
rarely seen even today. We can still profit tremendously from it.

------
siglesias
If anyone is interested in Bach's keyboard literature, it's hard to top the
interpretations of Glenn Gould, a fascinating musician in his own right. Here,
for example, is a seminal performance of the D minor concerto, conducted by
Leonard Bernstein:
[https://youtu.be/9ZX_XCYokQo?t=5m9s](https://youtu.be/9ZX_XCYokQo?t=5m9s)

~~~
madhadron
But note that it may not be to your taste if you do try them. I specialized in
early music, and I _hate_ Gould's playing. There are places in the two part
inventions where it feels to me like he chose his tempo to see how much he
could screw up the piece.

------
davesque
Bach is one of my favorite composers if not my most favorite. However, as
someone with a formal education in Western classical, it's always bothered me
how heroic figures are worshipped in the tradition, often while ignoring other
great artists. What I find much more interesting about Bach is the story of
how he became famous _as a composer_ , which as far as I know had a lot to do
with the reputation and advocacy if his sons after his death. During his
lifetime, he was known much more as a virtuosic organist.

------
creatornator
No one equals Bach, but some come close enough to make the answer unclear. My
favorite trivia about Boston's Symphony Hall is that there are dozens of empty
plaques along the balconies, where composer's names were going to be engraved
when the hall was built. The only name the trustees could agree on was
Beethoven. Not Bach, Mozart, Haydn, etc., only Beethoven, and his name is
front and center, above the stage. [0]

[0]: [https://www.bso.org/brands/symphony-hall/about-
us/historyarc...](https://www.bso.org/brands/symphony-hall/about-
us/historyarchives/the-history-of-symphony-hall.aspx)

------
blt
I care about music a lot, but I don't really listen to classical music. I
don't actively dislike it, but there are other music genres I like more.

Even as a total uneducated outsider, I can tell there is something special
about Bach. Especially the pieces for a small number of instruments like the
harpsichord. It captures something deep about the human spirit.

------
FraKtus
The music of Bach is pretty unique to listen to while coding. The parallel
structure of the music lines goes very well for a developer that must
coordinate multiple tasks. I discovered bach by myself, and it was a pretty
downing task. For curious minds, I would recommend the Goldberg variation, the
cello suite and the violin concerto in E major (BWV 1042) as a starting point.
At first most of his work may seem like a wall because so much is happening
... but with time you see the light. I remember at first the well-tempered
keyboard was like that, but now it just flows so nicely. It's also a delight
to listen to his music on original instruments such as the harpsichord. The
music is so much clearer when played on a harpsichord. From the same epoch
there are so many more to discover, one of my favorite is Domenico Scarlatti
and his 555 sonatas to be listened on harpsicord played by Scott Ross!

------
nomonomus
"Classical music has a lighter, clearer texture than Baroque music and is less
complex. It is mainly homophonic — a clear melody above a subordinate chordal
accompaniment. Counterpoint was by no means forgotten, especially later in the
period."[0]

People, just listen to some music, it doesn't matter, that the music is in
decline since the baroque period - the music needs listeners.

[edit] "Since there was a greater emphasis on a single melodic line, there was
greater emphasis on notating that line for dynamics and phrasing. This
contrasts with the Baroque era, when melodies were typically written with no
dynamics, phrasing marks or ornaments, as it was assumed that the performer
would improvise these elements on the spot. In the Classical era, it became
more common for composers to indicate where they wanted performers to play
ornaments such as trills or turns. The simplification of texture made such
instrumental detail more important, _and also made the use of characteristic
rhythms, such as attention-getting opening fanfares_ , the funeral march
rhythm, or the minuet genre, more important in establishing and unifying the
tone of a single movement."[0]

So, hello modern music, hello rap/r&b/soul and the likes. It's not worse, it's
incomparable. Most people react on rhythm and catchy sounds, hearing no
_music_ at all, really. Comparing music is nuts as many here pointed out, and
the question was different - can we have the next Bach? For me, the answer is
"yes", for sure! Can we hear him/her? - perhaps no, label's target group is
different.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_period_(music)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_period_\(music\))

------
Moorcountry
As a pianist from the age of 5 my ranking would be Mozart, Bach, than
Beethoven. Mozart was a prodigy on a level unheard of. He wrote in so many
different genres and such a short time period. Mostly though, is the pure
beauty and lyricism of his music. The consistency of quality. The Requiem and
the Magic Flute are required listening.

------
resource0x
It's hard to compare for equality, but in terms of musical talent, overall -
Keith Jarrett. For some context:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3FEBz5fby8&t=2464s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3FEBz5fby8&t=2464s)

------
mad_tortoise
Bach is my ninth great-grandfather for what its worth.

~~~
moosebear
Are you in touch with any other Bach descendants? What do you all get up to?

~~~
mad_tortoise
I only know my siblings and cousins, that have the same grandmother. We hang
out when we see each other and are in the same country.

Weirdly, when I was a kid there was some sort of royalty money that someone
messaged my father about.

------
tabtab
Bach's works can be strangely hypnotic in a way that's rare from other
artists. It's not inherently intense or dramatic, but has a way of triggering
intensity and drama through secondary means. I compare it to harmonic
induction, like pushing somebody on a swing. Each push is gentle pressure, but
the end result is high flying. Other artists require a catapult to take you up
there, and it makes a big racket. Bach sneaks you up there without you
noticing until a cloud sprays you with moisture.

------
te_chris
A key thing to remember about the baroque period: it was almost all improvised
- the original jazz, if you will.

Tonal harmony was one of my favourite papers at music school, learning the
rules of harmony to compose pieces like this from scratch. I wasn’t great at
it, but it’s an amazing skill to observe in those that can do it. I once had a
guitar masterclass and the tutor just stood up, jumped on the piano and
improvised a fugue. Our minds were blown.

------
ScipioAfricanus
Do yourself a favor and find The Canadian Brass' recording of Bach's glorious
Art of Fugue. My God it's beautiful.

------
truculation
On the BBC's _Desert Island Discs_ Douglas Adams chose pieces by Bach for no
less than three of his eight permitted musical recordings.

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0093qxj](http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0093qxj)

------
exolymph
today in "completely subjective judgments"

------
ahdroit
[https://youtu.be/9ZX_XCYokQo](https://youtu.be/9ZX_XCYokQo) Glenn Gould and
Leonard Bernstein: Bach's Keyboard Concerto No 1 in D minor (BWV 1052)

------
TipVFL
Damn, I was hoping this would be about a tool that would let me equal Bach.

~~~
zwieback
Here you go:
[https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.c...](https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//pubs/archive/45576.pdf)

------
_emacsomancer_
There are a number of great but not as well known earlier composers. William
Lawes comes to mind.

------
bane
_Now there is music from which a man can learn something._

\- W. A. Mozart (on hearing Bach motets in Leipzig)

In the multiverse I'm supremely happy that I've ended up in one where Bach
both existed and created tremendous amounts of music. You can spend a lifetime
exploring his oeuvre and find entire corners of delight.

I'm reminded of this thread from 2014:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7720708](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7720708)

Despite appearances to the contrary, I find that one of the powerful things
about Bach's work is how it is almost a kind of "abstract" auditory form that
just happens to be performed on instruments. What I mean is that many of his
pieces can be performed equally well on just about any combination of
instruments or voice and still be beautiful. It's not always true, but there's
a strange density of his music that seems like this.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zkPaGnKb5M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zkPaGnKb5M)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BvwM07BYvg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BvwM07BYvg)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKRj-T4l-e8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKRj-T4l-e8)

Some favorites:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLj_gMBqHX8&t=353s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLj_gMBqHX8&t=353s)
(BWV 1048 III Allegro)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWlfmepsUuQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWlfmepsUuQ)
(BWV 1049) - the reason why the Recorder has value as an instrument

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc4kWmxpZGs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc4kWmxpZGs)
(BWV 1060) - Every note the Oboe plays is made out of magic and delight here.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CexJQ8VWJfY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CexJQ8VWJfY)
(BWV 1051) - Even Violas can be beautiful, and this is one of the most
incredible pieces of music in all of music.

I think the next composer to have captured my attention has been Steve Reich.
And for entirely different reasons. I can take or leave his earliest highly
experimental works. But when he came into full form later on he created
majesty. Some of this music feel like being inside the engines of creation.
You'll find his fingerprints all over modern music.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Np9yApXD94](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Np9yApXD94)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMsYuFrKUQ8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMsYuFrKUQ8)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLZelvSvh3A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLZelvSvh3A)

------
jstewartmobile
Bach is very good, but he's no Toshiki Kadomatsu.

------
andbberger
No.

------
cup-of-tea
Today I am quitting reddit completely. With some of the time that I will save
every day I will listen to a piece of Bach. I've read _Gödel, Escher, Bach_
but never actually _listened_ to Bach.

~~~
forapurpose
Yes, as I was reading the article I thought, 'would my time be better spent
listening to Bach?' Maybe I should be thinking that now ...

------
planxty
No, no composer can equal Bach. Done. Upvote to the top please. :P

------
the_cat_kittles
usually when this question is asked, its asked in such a way that is kind of
tautological. in other words, it presupposes that the great things that bach
developed and invented are the _most important_ things, then says, "hey look,
heres the guy who did these things the best!"

i say this as someone who grew up worshipping bach. its not that he isnt every
bit as good as everyone says he is. its just that he does not have a monopoly
on "composition" or "music", and you would be well served to remember that!

------
FractalLP
Def my favorite composer.

------
rb808
DJ Khalid

------
ky738
The Rock

------
adamsea
Prince!

------
polotics
Damon Albarn

------
Uhhrrr
Good candidate for Betteridge's Law.

------
DEbCB
HN types think they're the smartest of the smart, yet judging from these
comments and from other music-related posts I've seen here, most of you listen
to popular music (including rock and rap) near exclusively. The comments
seriously offering up pop stars as equals of Bach are just sad.

Go on a pop diet. Cut back on it the way you might sugar or processed foods.
Try to spend a year listening to classical music only. These resources will
help you get started:

[https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/music](https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/music)

[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh9mgdi4rNezhx8YiGIV8...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh9mgdi4rNezhx8YiGIV8I22ICSuzslja)

~~~
paulcole
>Go on a pop diet. Cut back on it the way you might sugar or processed foods.
Try to spend a year listening to classical music only.

Why would anyone do any of these things? Besides the nebulous benefits of
realizing how wrong we were for enjoying rap?

~~~
DEbCB
Why would anyone read a serious novel, like Crime and Punishment, instead of a
comic book? Mozart's Jupiter Symphony will still be performed and appreciated
fifty years from now. Can the same be said for your cherished rap/pop songs?

~~~
Intermernet
Yes.

And I say this as someone who has been classically trained and absolutely
worships the music of Bach (and Mozart for that matter).

"The Message" by Grandmaster Flash, A lot of The Beastie Boys, Some Kendrick
Lamar, and many other hip-hop tracks and artists will _definitely_ still be
played and enjoyed 50 years in the future.

There are people who weren't alive at the beginning of hip-hop who are massive
fans of the early artists. They'll be as popular as the greats of early rock,
the greats of jazz etc.

You have to remember that when Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms etc were
composing there was also a lot of absolute dross being composed at the same
time. History forgets the garbage and remembers the greats. The same will
happen for all genres of music.

~~~
lmm
> There are people who weren't alive at the beginning of hip-hop who are
> massive fans of the early artists. They'll be as popular as the greats of
> early rock, the greats of jazz etc.

How many people still listen to even the greatest of Big Band music? Rock and
jazz have been passed down one or two generations but it's too soon to
conclude they'll live forever.

~~~
Intermernet
If Bach could survive without the benefit of recorded media, then rock, jazz,
big band and hiphop will survive easily. Maybe not forever, but definitely for
hundreds of years.

