Strauss.
.

.

 

Likewise, so we are in agreement.

 

Probably Richard Strauss but Johann II also wrote delightful music of a different kind.

 

I mean I'm leaning towards Strauss but it's kinda hard to decide.

 

Andrew Strauss was a good left-handed opening batsman but I always thought Marcus Trescothick had a slightly more varied repertoire of shots. He also had a better innings average for England: 43.79 against 40.91 (sorry - feeble attempt at a cricket analogy).

Joke over (such as it was...).

Richard Strauss, of course.

 

I still haven't found the value of Johann II. Blue Danube's fun, sure, but overall his waltzes are bland. I wouldn't really make a statement about him if it weren't for how popular/revered he was

Richard, on the other hand, wrote some of the best operas ever, and was a master orchestrater. His works are electric and exciting. I wouldn't call hime one of the "great" composers, but for me his music is infinitely more engaging than that of Johann II.

 

Richard by miles, and I don't even like him that much.

 

I haven't even heard Johann Strauss and I still know it's going to be Richard.

 

You probably have. He collaborated on the soundtrack to 2001 a Space Odyssey.

 

I prefer Johann Strauss. Wonderful Viennese elegance-the way life used to be.

 

Sounds pure and simple.

 

Levi Strauss !

 

I need a third choice! My favorite Strauss is Josef (1827 -1870), one of Johann's younger brothers, who was drafted by Johann to help keep the Strauss family music industry bubbling. He was a prolific composer up until his premature death, and among his dance pieces are a number of waltzes of a very special beauty, subtly different from his brother's. Among my favorites are "Austrian Village swallows," "Delirien," "Watercolors," and "Music of the Spheres." His melodies have a moody, sensuous poetry and take interesting harmonic turns, often dipping into the minor, which reveal a darker Romantic sensibility than that of Johann, who said of him "Pepi is the more gifted of us two; I am merely the more popular."

 

Johann Strauss wrote mainly waltzes and polkas. It's entertaining, but the artistic depth I'm looking for usually isn't there.

Richard Strauss wrote many excellent tone poems, chamber music, concertos, and a long string of operas which include some of the best 20th-century music ever written.

 

I'm puzzled how anybody could consider Thunder and Lightning Polka as other than profound.

 

Richard is my favourite so far, but I will need to listen to Josef, by the sound of it.

 

I rather hear waltzs of the STRAUSS family you know that would come to mind today.

 

If you want to hear the greatness that was Johann Strauss, please listen to either the great Chicago Symphony/Fritz Reiner compilation or the Carlos Kleiber/VPO collection.
Many of the waltzes chosen are not "mainstream" and you may be pleasantly surprised at the musical sophistication at work here.

Johann Strauss was a great genius. I just wish he used his gift to compose some symphonies, concertos, string quartets, etc;

 

I voted for Richard for his great body of work. However if it wasn't for JS II, André Rieu would be out of a job...and no André wouald mean that I couldn't leave my dignity at the merch stand.

What better way to get beaten up by football fans of both teams than by wearing this.

 

If you like Richard, try Wagner. If Strauss, try Johann.

:tiphat:

 

My vote goes to Karl Strauss

 

Johann for reminding me I'll sit out this dance.

Richard for putting me to sleep after 3 minutes.

 

When it comes to 'Strauss,' I prefer 'Richard'- in much the same way as when it comes to 'King Richard,' I prefer 'Strauss.'

;D

 

Johann is fun, but he didn't plumb the depths. On the other hand, Richard, beside all his crazy stuff, also wrote some nice waltzes. And some would think he trumps Johann in the dance department with that one piece from Salome. (Not me, of course .)

 

But the Blue Danube is by far, a long mile, the more popular work to a larger audience over anything Richard Strauss with his instrumental works and operas (whether in late Romantic style or atonal). Having said that, I do prefer R. Strauss overall.

 

But the Blue Danube is by far, a long mile, the more popular work to a larger audience over anything Richard Strauss with his instrumental works and operas (whether in late Romantic style or atonal). Having said that, I do prefer R. Strauss overall.

Maybe so. But as far as familiar works, the opening to Also Sprach Zarathustra is pretty ubiquitous.

 

I cannot stand Strauss's waltzes. I could put my foot through the TV screen when I watch with revulsion the spectacle of the Vienna Philharmonic's New Year concert playing these horrible medleys of inane 19th-century disco music to the well-dressed petty bourgeoisie. I could vomit, I really could.

 

Go for it.

I'll be sure to wear my best Dior dress for the occasion while waving at you Queen-Elizabeth-style through the tele.

 

WE weren't offered Oskar Straus.

 

Just for the record, Brahms and Wagner, who may have agreed on little else, had high opinions of the creative genius of J. Strauss and enjoyed his music. Wagner would have it played for him while relaxing after a hard day at Bayreuth, and said that Strauss's compositions had more artistic integrity than a lot of the "serious" music of the day.

 

Add my name to the list. Johann Strauss' waltzes are pure poetry. The lyrical lineage from the other great Austrian, W.A. Mozart to J. Strauss is unmistakeable.

For the doubters, two outstanding compilations are out there: Reiner/Chicago and C. Kleiber/Vienna Philharmonic.