Well?

Personally I like the Romantic era, large scale symphonic works are just the thing but I still enjoy music thats is mostly diatonic and tonal. So early 20th century also fits the bill (i.e. stravinsky, VW) but im not a big fan of things like Ligeti and Xenakis at all.

BAroque for me is slightly too shallow. while i admire its melodic complexity the lack of dissonances, dynamics and simple meters render it slightly dull.

Classical is a bit the same but I much prefer it.

Renessaince and anythign before it are just ugly to me.

Oh and sorry if this has been done before.

I would have to say that my favorite is the Romantic or Post Romantic period. But as this forum has taught me, there is a whole world that I have not discovered yet. Been getting into Bartok lately which is way out for me.

I voted for Romantic, but my favorite really is the late-Romantic/early 20th century. I noted that both eras were options on the poll, but Romantic is probably more accurate for me for the sake of this voting. Much of the mid to late 20th century is not music I enjoy very much. So, again, for the sake of this poll, Romantic is the closest to my tastes.

I do enjoy baroque music and renaissance, even medieval. My least favorite is the Classical period, as heretical as that is.

__________________
"Music is not philosophy." --Akira Ifukube

Like Tapkaara and kg4fxg, my favorite era is the Romantic period, but love the early 20th Century period too.

I'm least fond of the Baroque, Classical, and Modern periods.

What is the difference between 20th century and modern music? I guess modern music is anything composed since January 1, 2000?

Modern or "Contemporary" started as of 1975 and proceeded into our present time. 20th Century is lasted from 1900 to 2000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_music

Not to nit pick, but technically the 20th century lasted until Jan. 1, 2001. But since that's not very intuitive, most people use the 2000 date. Same with the year 1900 being the last year in the 19th century.

There are plenty of dissonances and odd meters in Baroque music. Well -- in Bach anyway. But if it sounds dull to you then it just doesn't speak to you, I guess, and it may never. I have similar issues with the Classic era. But there are plenty of other things that do speak to you, so it's not a problem in any way.

I couldn't respond to the poll because I like most eras equally well - early music to the present day. The exception is the Classic era which I find to be too simple in texture compared to the Baroque, and not bombastic enough compared to the Romantic.

But Mozart was a genius! But Mozart was a genius! But Mozart was a genius!

Simple in texture? Finale of the Symphony no, 41, String quartets op. 20, Grosse Fugue (!), "Der Welcher wandert diese Strasse" of the Magid Flute, and on and on... The Classical period starts out as simpler but with the influence of Bach and Handel it achieves once more the complex textures of late baroque, some time even mor complex because apparently more simple: Take any of the mature string quartets of Haydn and single out theme and accompaignment, it is impossible sometimes you discover yourself puzzled how theme becomes accopaignment and accompaignment becomes theme in a brilliant and sublte approach to classical "simplicity", the music of the three geniuses of this era has a large scale view and a control of its means unrivalled.

This is one of the reasons I like Classicism most.

You can't really put dates on it, MI. The "Modern" period is much more a matter of style than a chronological period- John Cage composed 4'33", an iconic modern piece, in 1952. By contrast, Piston's second violin concerto, which is not a "modern" piece, was composed in 1960.

I voted for 20th century, but I both the Classical and Modern eras are equally dear to me.

__________________
Take a look at the Bandit's blog, Americana Avenue.

I have a had time with the periods also.

I wanted to set up my iTunes library to help me learn more about a composer. So I turned to this website.

www.classicalarchives.com

You can go to this website for an explanation of the periods. I visit it frequently as I used it to classify composers. One composer could span two periods, what do you do? I decided to look up all composers in my library and classify them based on this website.

For example, all my composers in iTunes read like this....

Manuel de Falla (1876-1946); ESP
Manuel is listed as Modern Period

Arvo Pärt (1935-); EST
Arvo is listed as Contemporary Period

Erik Satie (1866-1925); FRA
Satie is Impressionist Period

I tried to used their periods to classify all my music.

Medieval
Renaissance
Baroque
Classical
Romantic
Late- / Post-Romantic
Impressionist
Modern
Contemporary

It is a bit of work but nice to have all the composers in iTunes match this format. And I learn something each time I browse through my library.

Of course I imported all my CD's into iTunes, but you could do the same with Microsoft Access. One place to know what do I have before I buy that CD for the second time.

__________________
No, it's a Bb. It looks wrong and it sounds wrong, but it's right - Vaughan Williams.

Bill Carter, CPA

DId john Cage realy compose 4'33 ?


YEs there are but at the time anything that sounded too odd or scary was forbidden or feared by the church so there are definite limits, it all sounds a bit too fancy and pretty much like the classical era - though Baroque has an advantage over classical for its textures in my opinion.

I agree with a lot of people, late romantic early 20th century is what I like most

I love the music of late Renaissance to middle Baroque most, and a few 20th century composers (Cage, Stockhausen, some Xenakis and some Feldman..). The music of the Classical era just irritates me most of the time (with the exception of a few pieces by lesser known composers, i.e. some of Ernst-Wilhelm Wolf's keyboard sonatas, a few works by CPE Bach, Anton Reicha's piano fugues, etc.). The Romantic era, well, is kind of hit and miss with me. I like many pieces by Beethoven and Schubert, but loathe equally many pieces by them. Can't stand Schumann or Chopin for some reason. *shrug*

If I may, I'd like to recommend listening to lute music (unless you have a problem with the sound of the instrument). Late 16th and early 17th century stuff is very free rhythmically, because it is firmly rooted in improvisation. The performers should be good, though. I suggest Hopkinson Smith's recordings of Kapsberger (mainly for the free toccatas) and Denis Gaultier (Andromede, the Lenclos tombeau, etc.). Or maybe listen to harpsichord works by composers inspired by lutenists, i.e. Froberger's suites (Remy's recording is nice, as is Leonhardt's) or Louis Couperin's unmeasured preludes (Francois' grandfather; there are many nice recordings).

There are also organ pieces by Peeter Cornet (early 17th century) which kind of tear up the rhythmic conventions of the day, but one has to have a good ear for polyphony to hear this, and, well, good luck finding recordings of his music