Arriaga.

Just to say something unexpected. We have masterpiece after masterpiece from Schubert and Mozart already, and God yes but I wish they had lived longer. One gets a sense for Mozart's future in his Clarinet Concerto, Piano Concerto #27 and Magic Flute, and it would have been even more tuneful, filled with exquisite sorrow and joy at the same time, and so much more deceptively simple. I think every piece would have had that Singspiel quality to it. Schubert too. He was just beginning to shake off the shadow of Beethoven. His music was becoming more introverted, tuneful and unhurried.

But Juan Crisóstomo Jacobo Antonio de Arriaga, I think he had tremendous potential. He only lived until he was 19. His last string quartets were his first mature pieces and they showed a genius's grasp of form, harmony, and melodic inventiveness. I think he would have exceeded Mendelssohn and would have kept company with Schubert.

He was called the Spanish Mozart, by the way.

 

Addenda:

Pergolesi might be my second choice. One wonders whether that Stabat Matter was a one-off event or whether that was the start of true greatness. Wasn't he 21 when he died, or also 19?

After that. Purcell. We got quite a few masterpieces out of Purcell, but it would have been interesting to see what more he could have done.

 

Debussy! Wish he could have completed his planned 6 sonatas and beyond. He was really onto something new and exciting.

 

Recommend a piece for me, one that typifies the direction Debussy was going.

* I listened to Chopin yesterday and the day before. I'm afraid I'm still a philistine. W̶a̶s̶ ̶g̶l̶a̶d̶ ̶w̶h̶e̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶d̶o̶o̶r̶ ̶h̶i̶t̶ ̶h̶i̶m̶ ̶o̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶w̶a̶y̶ ̶o̶u̶t̶.̶ **

** I categorically deny writing that.

 

It's over 10 years ago that a poll was held on this topic.

The add 20 years to their lifes Poll

On that occasion it was a runaway win for Wolfie and Little Mushroom.

Those two would be my choice, and if confined to one only it would be Little Mushroom.

 

Also Lili Boulanger. Even with an additional 20 years, dying at 44 still would have been tragic, but at least we’d have many more great works.

 

The new Quentin Tarantino movie about alternative history in classical music: The Dodecaphonic Tango:Webern in Argentina, starring Daniel Day-Lewis.

 

I wish Ravel had not gotten sick and began to unravel as he did, as he clearly had much more great music potentially to be realized. The two piano concertos were an indication of what could follow.

 

I wish Ravel had not gotten sick and began to unravel as he did, as he clearly had much more great music potentially to be realized. The two piano concertos were an indication of what could follow.

Terrible pun.

@vtpoet,

 

I think I might take five more years of Beethoven over 20 more years of anyone else.

 

Haydn was 77 when he died. Beethoven was 56. The question is add 20 yrs to their life. Haydn was productive to the end. Beethoven obviously had health issues but if he lived 20 more years he would have been deaf during this time and his music would have been who knows but the word "bizarre" comes to mind.

 

I would choose Bach because he's my favorite composer and was writing masterpieces throughout his life.

 

He was 65 when he died. That's not a bad "innings". With annother 20 years he might not have achieved much if had planned to retire or simply play an instrument to while the time away. With the likes of Mozart and Schubert there is a much greater likelihood of them achieving further highly noteworthy works.

 

Gustav Mahler is my choice.

 

If Mahler had lived 20 years longer, either his 9th symphony and DLvdE would have been severely anticlimactic, or they never would have existed.

 

Felix Mendelssohn, partly because he might have composed a great opera if he had had more time.

 

Obvious choices are Schubert, Mozart, Mendelssohn and Chopin, all of whom died before reaching 40. I'd probably go with Schubert as he died the youngest and had the most "mileage" left in him and I really dig his music.

A less obvious selection is Sibelius. Another 20 years of not finishing his 8th symphony! C'mon Jean, don't be so hard on yourself. I'm sure it's better than you think.

 

Carlo Gesualdo.

 

Ironic seeing he shortened the lives of two other people hur hur...

 

None, all my favs completed their destiny in music. Well except Mozart,,I really REALLY wished he had lived justa few months longer, in great health to complete his great Requiem,,this really is a great regrets which makes me sad at the loss of what would have made his Requiem something ,,even MORE unreal.

 

Beethoven or Mozart. Probably Mozart, just given that those 20 (37 to 57) would likely be extraordinarily productive.

 

For sentimental reasons alone I'd probably say Schubert but Starthrower's selection of Alban Berg could well be my 20th century choice. Even if he would provided relatively few works over another twenty years it's tantalising to think where his music could have took itself.

 

Alexander Scriabin

The man with a messiah complex who wanted to end/transform the world with his music died from an infection caused by a pimple on his lip, or was it a shaving cut? Either way, it's ridiculous. Like many other things about him. Which also makes his end kind of fitting.
There's an opinion out there that he had also reached his creative end. But that's just speculation if you ask me.
There could've been a lot more. From 1910-1914 he composed Sonatas 6-10, Vers la Flamme, Prometheus, and a number of solo piano pieces including the final set op Preludes, Op. 74.
Surely he was not done composing...?
Whether realizing a part of his fantasy project Mysterium, or something else, the potential for more orchestral music on the level of Poem of Ecstasy and Prometheus, two pieces I absolutely adore, is why I choose him over all the others.

 

Mozart and Schubert without question.

composers that have lived beyond 50 really have had enough time.

 

Why limit that to composers? Eh?

 

Hard choice between Tchaikovsky and Mozart, both didn't die out of age so I find it terrible they deceased in a relatively young age.

 

Vítězslava Kaprálová or Pergolesi or Purcell or Schubert or Mozart

 

Mozart or Schubert. They died so early and still gave us so many masterpieces.

 

I wish Bruckner had lived longer and had been able to complete his ninth symphony and to put it in definitive form . But fortunately we have completions by William Caragan ( a Facebook friend of mine ! ) , and several other musicologists .
Basically , the finale is more or less complete, and only the coda is lacking . According to some stories , which may be dubious, some of Bruckner;s friends took pages of the manuscript of the finale as souvenirs when he died in 1896 . If this is true, who knows what happened to them !
If Bruckner had lived longer he would no doubt have made revisions to the entire symphony and there is no telling what a definitive version of the symphony might be like .
But I'm no longer satisfied with hearing the familiar three movement torso alone after hearing Caragan's version . The finale dispels the anguish and terror of the first movement and the deep longing of the slow movement and resolves everything quite convincingly .

 

Just want to derail the thread a bit for a fun fact. The charlatan ophthalmic surgeon who blinded Bach, and ultimately caused his death due to complications from the botched cataract surgery, also blinded Handel in a later attempt at the same surgical procedure, but managed not to quite kill him. Makes one a little bit more grateful for modern medicine. It's a wonder any of these old composers survived to give us even a few works.

 

Vincenzo Bellini : besides dying way to early he would have made some other great operas.

 

Mozart would be my second choice has he seemed to be going fantastic places with his late works but ultimatley I think I have to go with Mahler. He would have completed his 10th symphony and, unlike Mozart, if Mahler had lived another twenty years we would likely have recordings of him conducting which would be quite interesting.