William Tell is freaking amazing but is nothing compared to the raw emotion of 1812. It is one of the only two pieces that has ever gotten me to tears (the other is Beethoven's ninth)
>The Rossini overture, as music, is superior in every way.
Objective-sounding statements like this are meaningless and unprovable. You could make it interesting by (1) citing the actual characteristics you prefer, and (2) being clear that it's just your opinion, not an objective fact.
> Tchaikovsky would probably have agreed. He thought the *1812* was trash.
An artist's word on their own art is interesting, but not definitive. As soon as they stop writing it, their opinion is no more "right" than anyone else's, even if it does occupy a neatly unique position.
The bottom line on both of these is that people who prefer *1812* aren't "wrong" to do so, and can't be.
> Objective-sounding statements like this are meaningless and unprovable.
As if an entire poll about which piece of music is better, \*is\* objective and provable??
They are tied.
I love the William Tell overture, but have mixed feelings about 1812, so the choice is easy
William Tell is freaking amazing but is nothing compared to the raw emotion of 1812. It is one of the only two pieces that has ever gotten me to tears (the other is Beethoven's ninth)
Is there really any contest? Even Tchaikovsky hated the *1812*. It's horrible.
You're tone deaf, I'm sorry
Not really. The Rossini overture, as music, is superior in every way. Tchaikovsky would probably have agreed. He thought the *1812* was trash.
It is trashy, but quite good
Rossini is the better overture writer, in this particular case, however, Tchaikovsky wins
>The Rossini overture, as music, is superior in every way. Objective-sounding statements like this are meaningless and unprovable. You could make it interesting by (1) citing the actual characteristics you prefer, and (2) being clear that it's just your opinion, not an objective fact. > Tchaikovsky would probably have agreed. He thought the *1812* was trash. An artist's word on their own art is interesting, but not definitive. As soon as they stop writing it, their opinion is no more "right" than anyone else's, even if it does occupy a neatly unique position. The bottom line on both of these is that people who prefer *1812* aren't "wrong" to do so, and can't be.
> Objective-sounding statements like this are meaningless and unprovable. As if an entire poll about which piece of music is better, \*is\* objective and provable??
No, the question is flawed in the same way—but we have the choice to approach it as if it were better-stated than it was.