TromboneChat

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2026 12:50 pm**

Here is an interesting graphic compiled by... someone on the internet.

The 100 most-frequently-performed symphonies at Carnegie Hall since its opening in 1891. The dot is placed at the year they were composed, the size of the dot represents the number of performances. Most of those performances will be by the NY Philharmonic (and the now-defunct NY Symphony) but not exclusively so.

This only counts symphonies so oft-performed composers like Verdi and Wagner don't make a showing here.

None-the-less, it is telling that although a number of early-to-mid 20th Century symphonies have been able to outpace works that were already established rep by 1891, nothing since 1953 has managed to crack the list. Almost three quarters of a century have passed without the emergence of a successful symphony and even if we let the clock run for another 100 years I doubt this list would change much.

CarnegieSymphonies.png

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2026 1:58 pm**

Possibly related - in 1946 the dominant entertainment medium was radio, with only .5% of households owning a TV. By 1954 TV became the dominant medium for entertainment, with 55% of houses owning a TV.

I can tell you which one is better to listen to new symphonies on, that's for sure, especially in the 1950's.

Personally I think that after Rachmaninoff wrote his 2nd piano concerto, people realized that they couldn't write anything that would ever sound that beautiful again, so they started trying to write the least pleasant music to listen to that people would still buy tickets to hear, and experiment with ways to outdo each other with how bad it could sound before people would stop coming altogether. We're almost there - we've almost hit the bottom!

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2026 2:00 pm**

That is very interesting and absolutely not surprising.
The same graph but with concertos would be also very enlightening, and I think we would see a little bit more recent works.

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2026 4:06 pm**

robcat2075 wrote: Sun Mar 29, 2026 12:50 pm Almost three quarters of a century have passed without the emergence of a successful symphony and even if we let the clock run for another 100 years I doubt this list would change much.

That's a flawed reasoning. Symphonies stopped being the "flagship" compositional form of most composers (to the extent the ever really were) over a century ago. Modern composers are mostly not writing, or being commissioned, symphonies.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 5:07 am**

What happened to influence the Carnegie performance of symphonies composed ca. 1860?

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 5:40 am**

KWL wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2026 5:07 am What happened to influence the Carnegie performance of symphonies composed ca. 1860?

Thats more representative of a lack of notable symphonies from that time period in the canon in general, than of anything to do with Carnegie programming specifically.

Schumann and Mendelssohn were dead by then. Liszt, Berlioz and Wagner were not writing symphonies. Dvorak and Tchaikovsky were only 19 or 20 in 1860 and wouldn't write symphonies until a few years later, and even then those are seen as "youth works" and rarely played (anything earlier than Dvorak 6 and Tchaik 4). Meanwhile, Brahms and Bruckner were older, but didn't start finishing symphonies until later in their lives compared to the other symphonists on the chart.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 7:06 am**

They are not very popular symphonies, but Kalevi Aho's idea to write long concerti and call them symphonies was an interesting tactic.

I think Claf is right about the concerto form dominating the classical music scene in the last 50 years or so, or at least pushing the idea of the symphony onto the back burner for serious composers.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 8:17 am**

it's kind of circular reasoning, isn't it? orchestras so rarely program outside the "accepted" literature, so composers write less symphonies, which leads to orchestras rarely programming outside the accepted literature, which leads to.... if you write a concerto you have a greater chance of being programmed, which is more of a problem with the conservatism of orchestral leadership more than an innate qualifier of the quality of the music.

like, orchestras keep dying, right? and they keep programming the "great" music of the past. just as easy to say that's why as it is to blame it on the occasional new piece of music that gets played once. you can even interpret the infographic to correlate the downfall of orchestra with the downfall of programming new pieces and building a new and lasting canon.

also, as i've said more than a few times here, just attacking "new music" like it's a monolith over and over isn't that fun or cool. mahler and beethoven aren't going anywhere, even if some new pieces break through, don't worry. there's space for all sorts of things if we have the courage.

the current model of predominately programming just the hits from the 1800s isn't working.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 9:11 am**

I was being tongue in cheek about modern music, for sure -- there are many composers in the last 30 years or so writing music that I love. But I don't believe that composers are even attempting to write music like Rachmaninoff (for example) anymore. Is it just that it isn't getting programmed and I'm not hearing new "beautiful" music, but it's being written and rejected, or are most composers still trying to "outsmart" Romantic music?

I'm a sucker for a melodic line -- I want to leave the concert hall with the music humming in my head -- but I rarely hear singable melodies in modern classical music anymore . Meanwhile you can take a melody out of Rach and it is literally a pop song:

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 9:48 am**

harrisonreed wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2026 9:11 am Meanwhile you can take a melody out of Rach and it is literally a pop song:

Reduce, reuse, recycle.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 11:25 am**

WilliamLang wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2026 8:17 am the current model of predominately programming just the hits from the 1800s isn't working.

On the whole I agree with everything you wrote here, Will.

At the same time, orchestra administrators can always point to the difference in ticket sales numbers between a concert that ends with Beethoven 5 and a concert that ends with even something as immediately listenable as Sibelius or Prokofiev 5. Never mind John Harbison's Symphony No. 5, which I was fortunate to play the premiere of with the Boston Symphony several years back...and by several, I mean it might have been in the 20th century, and furthermore, a likely reason the BSO programmed it at all was that Harbison lives about 20 minutes away.

I remember when I was in school at Oberlin and Christoph von Dohnanyi in Cleveland made news by programming the Prelude and Liebestod from Tristan and Isolde at the beginning of a concert, followed immediately by Ligeti's Atmospheres...but rather than stop and accept applause after Wagner, he wrote a transition directly to Ligeti, forcing the audience to stay in the hall and listen. The conservative subscribers were outraged - OUTRAGED I tell you! - that they were forced to listen to music they didn't know.

Was that the best way to attempt to open their minds? Probably not.

I don't really know what the answer is, but I think for organizations like symphony orchestras and chamber music societies drawing general music-loving audiences it probably starts with putting a lot of thought and care into programming so that new and/or less familiar music is chosen for more than fashion or for checking boxes, and that concert programs themselves make some sort of artistic statement that demonstrates connections of the music tradition through time (among other considerations). And then it's really important that the marketing departments and the people on stage know how to talk about it. Then the old music is not just museum music, and the new music is more than the vegetables we know we should eat.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 11:27 am**

I believe some of you are misreading the chart.
The timeline shows when symphonies were composed, not when they were performed.
The size of the bubble shows the cumulative number of performances of that symphony at Carnegie Hall since 1891.
So apparently about 300 performances of Beethoven 3, 5 & 7; and Brahms 1, 2, & 4.
Of course over the past 135 years, Beethoven had quite a head start!

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 12:11 pm**

That's what I'm saying about the comparison with when TVs became ubiquitous. Pieces composed right before 1950 had a chance to become part of the canon, possibly because they would have been played on the radio and that's what people had in the 40's. After 1953, newly composed pieces do not make the list.

Going based off the chart you'd think over the last 73 years *some* piece would make this chart (looks like they need 50 performances to get a dot) ... But no. It only looks at symphonies though, so there is that.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 1:14 pm**

harrisonreed wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2026 12:11 pm After 1953, newly composed pieces do not make the list.

Going based off the chart you'd think over the last 73 years *some* piece would make this chart (looks like they need 50 performances to get a dot).

Hard to tell without seeing the original article/data/discussion. But

I presume this data includes not just the New York orchestras but all the visiting ensembles who have played at Carnegie Hall?

Some of the bubbles are pretty small (e.g., Bruckner 5, Dvořák 6, ...), indicating perhaps fewer than 20 performances over the past 135 years.

If it takes 20 performances to get a bubble, does that mean than no symphonies composed since 1953 have had very many performances at Carnegie Hall (which the N Y Phil abandoned for Lincoln Center in 1962)?

Just for fun, I wonder what are the most frequently performed "modern" symphonies (say since ~1940) - not just at Carnegie Hall? Perhaps Shostakovich or Prokofiev?

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 3:53 pm**

Tone poems had their time in the sun. Start charting movie music, and I'll bet you'll see a dovetail. Movies are a great way to get people to love classical styles or techniques. I don't think symphonies trailing off is a bad thing. People can talk smack about opera and ballet, but movies are just the modern incarnation of those forms.

Carnegie is kind of a snooty microcosm. If you look at a broader spectrum of orchestras (and orchestras aren't the only ones to play at Carnegie) you'll see a lot of Broadway, even video game music, and not to mention a lot of non-classical forms. There are a lot of genres that didn't exist during the Civil War. It's natural for one category to fade a little. Is somebody claiming that chart means something? You can only play so much music at one hall.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2026 4:10 pm**

Posaunus wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2026 1:14 pm If it takes 20 performances to get a bubble, does that mean than no symphonies composed since 1953 have had very many performances at Carnegie Hall (which the N Y Phil abandoned for Lincoln Center in 1962)? [/list]

Yes, that is what it means. None have been able to rack up enough dates to displace an older place-holder, not even the works that are there only because of a brief window of super-popularity, such as the Franck D minor Symphony (hugely popular in the interwar years, not nearly so much before or after.)

To get a small idea of what Carnegie Hall was programming after the NY Phil left, i looked through the archive of programs for 1975. There was still a steady stream of full orchestras appearing, typically near-ish orchestras like Boston, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Pittsburgh but also many others.

A Carnegie Hall patron could still go to symphony orchestra concerts every week and more if he or she wished.

Random example

Friday, May 23, 1975 at 8 PM
Main Hall
PRESENTED BY Utah Symphony
Utah Symphony Orchestra

Maurice Abravanel, Conductor

Aaron Copland (1900— 1990) Billy the Kid Suite (1939 arr. Aaron Copland)
Ralph Vaughan Williams (1872— 1958) Symphony No. 8 in D Minor (1955)
Sergey Prokofiev (1891— 1953) Symphony No. 7 in C-sharp Minor, Op. 131 (1952)

Look at that program! Nothing more than 36 old years on that concert date, all debuted within the living memory of most of the audience, music that didn't exist when they were born.

Imagine trying to program a concert today of orchestral music written only since 1990... and that could still sell tickets.

The NY Times critic took a moment to damn with faint praise. Note what he regards as "naive".

AbravanelUtah.jpg

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2026 7:52 pm**

claf wrote: Sun Mar 29, 2026 2:00 pm That is very interesting and absolutely not surprising.
The same graph but with concertos would be also very enlightening, and I think we would see a little bit more recent works.

Carnegie Hall has a chatbot that attempts to answer such queries.

I tried asking for the 100 most-performed concertos but #1 on that list was "Star Spangled Banner" and I regarded that as inaccurate.

Here is a list of the top 50, sorted by year. The URL at the end of each line will take you to a page listing every performance.

Year Perfs Concerto Title Composer
1713 104 Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 in G Major, BWV 1048 [Johann Sebastian Bach](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1003166)
1718 57 Brandenburg Concerto No. 2 in F Major, BWV 1047 [Johann Sebastian Bach](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1003166)
1721 57 Brandenburg Concerto No. 5 in D Major, BWV 1050 [Johann Sebastian Bach](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1003166)
1723 87 Concerto for Two Violins in D Minor, BWV 1043 [Johann Sebastian Bach](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1003166)
1723 71 Violin Concerto in E Major, BWV 1042 [Johann Sebastian Bach](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1003166)
1723 66 Violin Concerto in A Minor, BWV 1041 [Johann Sebastian Bach](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1003166)
1735 105 Concerto in the Italian Style, BWV 971 [Johann Sebastian Bach](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1003166)
1775 106 Violin Concerto No. 5 in A Major, K. 219, "Turkish" [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1006075)
1775 75 Violin Concerto No. 4 in D Major, K. 218 [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1006075)
1775 58 Violin Concerto No. 3 in G Major, K. 216 [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1006075)
1783 53 Cello Concerto in D Major, H.VIIb:2 [Joseph Haydn](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1003781)
1785 79 Piano Concerto No. 20 in D Minor, K. 466 [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1006075)
1785 53 Piano Concerto No. 21 in C Major, K. 467 [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1006075)
1786 67 Piano Concerto No. 23 in A Major, K. 488 [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1006075)
1793 55 Piano Concerto No. 2 in B-flat Major, Op. 19 [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1795 81 Piano Concerto No. 1 in C Major, Op. 15 [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1800 132 Piano Concerto No. 3 in C Minor, Op. 37 [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1806 248 Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 61 [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1806 193 Piano Concerto No. 4 in G Major, Op. 58 [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1809 221 Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-flat Major, Op. 73, "Emperor" [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1817 67 Violin Concerto No. 1 in D Major, Op. 6 [NicolÃ² Paganini](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1007610)
1830 100 Piano Concerto No. 2 in F Minor, Op. 21 [Frederic Chopin](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1006444)
1830 66 Piano Concerto No. 1 in E Minor, Op. 11 [Frederic Chopin](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1006444)
1839 66 Piano Concerto No. 2 in A Major, S. 125 [Franz Liszt](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1001205)
1844 290 Violin Concerto in E Minor, Op. 64 [Felix Mendelssohn](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1010675)
1845 189 Piano Concerto in A Minor, Op. 54 [Robert Schumann](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1000525)
1849 167 Piano Concerto No. 1 in E-flat Major, S. 124 [Franz Liszt](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1001205)
1850 53 Cello Concerto in A Minor, Op. 129 [Robert Schumann](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1000525)
1858 139 Piano Concerto No. 1 in D Minor, Op. 15 [Johannes Brahms](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1004316)
1862 73 Violin Concerto No. 2 in D Minor, Op. 22 [Henryk Wieniawski](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1002506)
1868 62 Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 22 [Camille Saint-SaÃ«ns](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/41588)
1868 92 Piano Concerto in A Minor, Op. 16 [Edvard Grieg](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1000740)
1868 180 Violin Concerto No. 1 in G Minor, Op. 26 [Max Bruch](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1008524)
1872 67 Cello Concerto No. 1 in A Minor, Op. 33 [Camille Saint-SaÃ«ns](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/41588)
1875 188 Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-flat Minor, Op. 23 [Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/18239)
1878 257 Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 77 [Johannes Brahms](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1004316)
1878 230 Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 35 [Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/18239)
1880 52 Violin Concerto in A Minor, Op. 53 [Antonin Dvorak](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/10716)
1880 83 Violin Concerto No. 3 in B Minor, Op. 61 [Camille Saint-SaÃ«ns](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/41588)
1881 149 Piano Concerto No. 2 in B-flat Major, Op. 83 [Johannes Brahms](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1004316)
1887 65 Concerto for Violin and Cello in A Minor, Op. 102 [Johannes Brahms](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1004316)
1895 69 Cello Concerto in B Minor, Op. 104 [Antonin Dvorak](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/10716)
1901 122 Piano Concerto No. 2 in C Minor, Op. 18 [Sergei Rachmaninoff](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/52002)
1903 97 Violin Concerto in D Minor, Op. 47 [Jean Sibelius](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1001010)
1904 88 Violin Concerto in A Minor, Op. 82 [Alexander Glazunov](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1009300)
1909 91 Piano Concerto No. 3 in D Minor, Op. 30 [Sergei Rachmaninoff](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/52002)
1921 70 Piano Concerto No. 3 in C Major, Op. 26 [Sergey Prokofiev](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/43414)
1931 50 Piano Concerto in G Major [Maurice Ravel](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/719)
1935 48 Violin Concerto No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 63 [Sergey Prokofiev](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/43414)
1943 78 Concerto for Orchestra, BB 123 [Bela Bartok](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/39524)

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2026 8:19 pm**

robcat2075 wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2026 7:52 pm
claf wrote: Sun Mar 29, 2026 2:00 pm That is very interesting and absolutely not surprising.
The same graph but with concertos would be also very enlightening, and I think we would see a little bit more recent works.
Here is a list of the top 50, sorted by year. The URL at the end of each line will take you to a page listing every performance.

Year Perfs Concerto Title Composer
1806 248 Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 61 [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1806 193 Piano Concerto No. 4 in G Major, Op. 58 [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1809 221 Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-flat Major, Op. 73, "Emperor" [Ludwig van Beethoven](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1005833)
1844 290 Violin Concerto in E Minor, Op. 64 [Felix Mendelssohn](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1010675)
1845 189 Piano Concerto in A Minor, Op. 54 [Robert Schumann](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1000525)
1875 188 Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-flat Minor, Op. 23 [Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/18239)
1878 257 Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 77 [Johannes Brahms](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/1004316)
1878 230 Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 35 [Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky](http://data.carnegiehall.org/names/18239)

Thanks Rob. No real surprises here - it's the same story all over the U.S.A. (and Europe), not just at Carnegie Hall.

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2026 8:28 pm**

Posaunus wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2026 8:19 pm No real surprises here - it's the same story all over the U.S.A. (and Europe), not just at Carnegie Hall.

I'm half-thinking that the reason it couldn't do a top 100 list was that there weren't 100 to list.

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2026 10:41 pm**

A simple attempt to visualize the concerto data
The horizontal axis is year of composition, the height of the bars is the total performances at Carnegie Hall.

Remember, this is just the top 50

50ConcertosGraphed.jpg

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2026 1:26 pm**

One more try. I couldn't get the top 100 concertos but asking for the top 99 worked

There are 36 composers among this top 99.
Mozart has the most works on this list, 15. Bach has 13,
One mostly-atonal work (Berg Violin Concerto) manages to crack the bottom of the list.

Sorted by number of performances:
Year Perfs Label Title
1844 290 Felix Mendelssohn Violin Concerto in E Minor, Op. 64
1878 257 Johannes Brahms Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 77
1806 248 Ludwig van Beethoven Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 61
1878 230 Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto in D Major, Op. 35
1809 221 Ludwig van Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-flat Major, Op. 73, "Emperor"
1806 194 Ludwig van Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 4 in G Major, Op. 58
1845 189 Robert Schumann Piano Concerto in A Minor, Op. 54
1875 188 Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 1 in B-flat Minor, Op. 23
1868 180 Max Bruch Violin Concerto No. 1 in G Minor, Op. 26
1849 175 Franz Liszt Piano Concerto No. 1 in E-flat Major, S. 124
1881 149 Johannes Brahms Piano Concerto No. 2 in B-flat Major, Op. 83
1858 139 Johannes Brahms Piano Concerto No. 1 in D Minor, Op. 15
1800 132 Ludwig van Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 3 in C Minor, Op. 37
1901 122 Sergei Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto No. 2 in C Minor, Op. 18
1775 106 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Violin Concerto No. 5 in A Major, K. 219, "Turkish"
1735 105 Johann Sebastian Bach Concerto in the Italian Style, BWV 971 *(solo keyboard work, no orchestra)
1713 104 Johann Sebastian Bach Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 in G Major, BWV 1048
1830 100 Frederic Chopin Piano Concerto No. 2 in F Minor, Op. 21
1903 97 Jean Sibelius Violin Concerto in D Minor, Op. 47
1868 92 Edvard Grieg Piano Concerto in A Minor, Op. 16
1909 91 Sergei Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto No. 3 in D Minor, Op. 30
1904 88 Alexander Glazunov Violin Concerto in A Minor, Op. 82
1723 87 Johann Sebastian Bach Concerto for Two Violins in D Minor, BWV 1043
1880 83 Camille Saint-SaÃ«ns Violin Concerto No. 3 in B Minor, Op. 61
1795 81 Ludwig van Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 1 in C Major, Op. 15
1785 79 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 20 in D Minor, K. 466
1943 78 BÃ©la BartÃ³k Concerto for Orchestra, BB 123
1775 75 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Violin Concerto No. 4 in D Major, K. 218
1862 73 Henryk Wieniawski Violin Concerto No. 2 in D Minor, Op. 22
1723 71 Johann Sebastian Bach Violin Concerto in E Major, BWV 1042
1921 70 Sergey Prokofiev Piano Concerto No. 3 in C Major, Op. 26
1895 69 AntonÃn DvorÃ¡k Cello Concerto in B Minor, Op. 104
1872 67 Camille Saint-SaÃ«ns Cello Concerto No. 1 in A Minor, Op. 33
1786 67 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 23 in A Major, K. 488
1817 67 NicolÃ² Paganini Violin Concerto No. 1 in D Major, Op. 6
1723 66 Johann Sebastian Bach Violin Concerto in A Minor, BWV 1041
1839 66 Franz Liszt Piano Concerto No. 2 in A Major, S. 125
1830 66 Frederic Chopin Piano Concerto No. 1 in E Minor, Op. 11
1887 65 Johannes Brahms Concerto for Violin and Cello in A Minor, Op. 102
1868 62 Camille Saint-SaÃ«ns Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 22
1775 58 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Violin Concerto No. 3 in G Major, K. 216
1718 57 Johann Sebastian Bach Brandenburg Concerto No. 2 in F Major, BWV 1047
1721 57 Johann Sebastian Bach Brandenburg Concerto No. 5 in D Major, BWV 1050
1793 55 Ludwig van Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 2 in B-flat Major, Op. 19
1785 53 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 21 in C Major, K. 467
1850 53 Robert Schumann Cello Concerto in A Minor, Op. 129
1783 53 Joseph Haydn Cello Concerto in D Major, H.VIIb:2
1880 52 AntonÃn DvorÃ¡k Violin Concerto in A Minor, Op. 53
1931 50 Maurice Ravel Piano Concerto in G Major
1935 48 Sergey Prokofiev Violin Concerto No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 63
1786 48 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 24 in C Minor, K. 491
1844 48 Felix Mendelssohn Violin Concerto in E Minor, Op. 64: 3. Allegretto non troppo â€“ Allegro molto vivace
1740 47 Johann Sebastian Bach Concerto for Harpsichord in D Minor, BWV 1052
1844 47 Felix Mendelssohn Violin Concerto in E Minor, Op. 64: 1. Allegro molto appassionato
1804 46 Ludwig van Beethoven Triple Concerto in C Major, Op. 56
1777 45 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 9 in E-flat Major, K. 271, "Jeunehomme"
1785 44 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 22 in E-flat Major, K. 482
1711 44 Antonio Vivaldi Concerto for 4 Violins in B Minor, RV 580
1826 44 NicolÃ² Paganini Violin Concerto No. 2 in B Minor, Op. 7: 3. La campanella
1850 44 Henri Vieuxtemps Violin Concerto No. 4 in D Minor, Op. 31
1714 44 Arcangelo Corelli Concerto Grosso in G Minor, Op. 6, No. 8, "Christmas"
1791 44 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 27 in B-flat Major, K. 595
1861 43 Henri Vieuxtemps Violin Concerto No. 5 in A Minor, Op. 37, "Gretry"
1925 43 George Gershwin Piano Concerto in F Major
1784 42 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 17 in G Major, K. 453
1831 42 Felix Mendelssohn Piano Concerto No. 1 in G Minor, Op. 25
1779 40 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Concerto for Two Pianos in E-flat Major, K. 365
1720 40 Johann Sebastian Bach Brandenburg Concerto No. 4 in G Major, BWV 1049
1723 38 Johann Sebastian Bach Concerto for Two Violins in D Minor, BWV 1043: 1. Vivace
1930 37 Maurice Ravel Piano Concerto for the Left Hand
1878 37 Max Bruch Violin Concerto No. 2 in D Minor, Op. 44
1940 36 Samuel Barber Violin Concerto, Op. 14
1877 36 Carl Goldmark Violin Concerto in A Minor, Op. 28
1739 35 George Frideric Handel Concerto Grosso in B Minor, Op. 6, No. 12, HWV 330
1917 35 Sergey Prokofiev Violin Concerto No. 1 in D Major, Op. 19
1711 35 Antonio Vivaldi Concerto for Two Violins and Cello in D Minor, RV 565
1913 34 Sergey Prokofiev Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 16
1844 34 Felix Mendelssohn Violin Concerto in E Minor, Op. 64: 2. Andante
1874 33 Camille Saint-SaÃ«ns Piano Concerto No. 4 in C Minor, Op. 44
1886 33 Edward MacDowell Piano Concerto No. 2 in D Minor, Op. 23
1782 32 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 12 in A Major, K. 414
1864 32 Anton Rubinstein Piano Concerto No. 4 in D Minor, Op. 70
1945 32 BÃ©la BartÃ³k Piano Concerto No. 3, BB 127
1896 30 Jules Conus Violin Concerto in E Minor
1710 29 Johann Sebastian Bach Brandenburg Concerto No. 6 in B-flat Major, BWV 1051
1933 28 Dmitry Shostakovich Piano Concerto No. 1 in C Minor, Op. 35
1728 28 Antonio Vivaldi Violin Concerto in F Minor, RV 297, "Winter"
1938 27 BÃ©la BartÃ³k Violin Concerto No. 2, BB 117
1791 27 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Clarinet Concerto in A Major, K. 622
1717 27 Johann Sebastian Bach Brandenburg Concerto No. 1 in F Major, BWV 1046
1797 27 Giovanni Battista Viotti Violin Concerto No. 22 in A Minor
1720 27 Antonio Vivaldi Concerto for Two Violins in A Minor, RV 522
1736 26 Johann Sebastian Bach Concerto for Oboe and Violin in C Minor, BWV 1060R
1739 25 George Frideric Handel Concerto Grosso in D Minor, Op. 6, No. 10, HWV 328
1765 25 Joseph Haydn Cello Concerto in C Major, H.VIIb:1
1784 23 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Concerto No. 14 in E-flat Major, K. 449
1935 23 Alban Berg Violin Concerto
1877 23 Edouard Lalo Cello Concerto in D Minor
1739 23 George Frideric Handel Concerto Grosso in G Minor, Op. 6, No. 6, HWV 324

Plotted by year

Top99ConcertosPlottedByYear.jpg

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2026 3:53 am**

WilliamLang wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2026 8:17 am also, as i've said more than a few times here, just attacking "new music" like it's a monolith over and over isn't that fun or cool. mahler and beethoven aren't going anywhere, even if some new pieces break through, don't worry. there's space for all sorts of things if we have the courage.

the current model of predominately programming just the hits from the 1800s isn't working.

The NY scene seems particularly conservative (I've seen people walking out of the Rite in a NY Phil concert), actually maybe that's the US as a whole. It would be interesting to compare to, say, the Berlin Philharmonie or Concertgebauw.

There are examples of bringing an audience along, such as Ratlle at Birmingham. It takes stability, time, and not selling the orchestra like a leather-bound encclopedia.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2026 9:00 am**

What percentage of total works performed (or performing time) do these 100 symphonies represent?

It seems orchestras are keen to anchor their concerts around an old warhorse that people have heard of and either actually like or feel that they should like (anything by Brueckner belongs in the latter category, just couldn't help myself), so that the vegetables they serve around it will actually be consumed.

I have to admit that, even as a reasonably educated music lover, I am unlikely to attend a concert where there isn't at least one piece I both know and like, slogging through a concert full of atonal pieces using every possible piece of percussion feels like a long sermon about my wretchedness.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2026 9:51 am**

JTeagarden wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 9:00 am What percentage of total works performed (or performing time) do these 100 symphonies represent?

I would guess that all symphonies as a group are a fairly low percentage... 10%... since many performances are not symphony orchestras and and there are many forms besides symphonies that can be performed.

Let's ask the data chatbot...

Q:What percentage of the music performed at Carnegie Hall are symphonies?

Chatbot: Approximately 1.29% of the works performed at Carnegie Hall are symphonies, with 1,439 out of 111,220 total works being symphonies.

However, my confidence in the Carnegie hall data chatbot is declning. When i ask...

Q: How many different symphonies have been performed?

Chatbot:There have been 109,299 different symphonies performed at Carnegie Hall.

That seems unlikely in view of the previous answer.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2026 9:58 am**

I should have qualified: The universe is performances by symphony orchestras.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2026 10:38 am**

JTeagarden wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 9:58 am I should have qualified: The universe is performances by symphony orchestras.

Unfortunately "symphony orchestra" isn't a clear term the chatbot can work with, probably because there is no ensemble named "Symphony Orchestra"

If i make a very specific inquiry, a possibly correct answer is produced

Q:What percentage of works performed by the New York Philharmonic are symphonies?

A:The percentage of works performed by the New York Philharmonic that are symphonies is 9.69%.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2026 10:46 am**

JTeagarden wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 9:00 am It seems orchestras are keen to anchor their concerts around an old warhorse that people have heard of and either actually like or feel that they should like [I actually enjoy listening to Bruckner symphonies], so that the vegetables they serve around it will actually be consumed.

I go to a lot of orchestra concerts (and would attend more if I had the time and money). JTeagarden is correct - almost all concerts these days are anchored by a well-known "entrée" (either a concerto performed by a highly-promoted virtuoso soloist, or one of the symphonies from the "top 100" canon). Depending on the orchestra and music director, the surrounding "vegetables" are often a delight to consume, and really make the experience memorable (rather than just another déjà vu).

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2026 12:54 pm**

Posaunus wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 10:46 am JTeagarden is correct - almost all concerts these days are anchored by a well-known "entrée" (either a concerto performed by a highly-promoted virtuoso soloist, or one of the symphonies from the "top 100" canon).

But that is not new. As I peruse the archives of 19th Century orchestra programs, I see that is the rule. It is RARE to see a subscription concert taken up by works and composers who would be utterly unfamiliar to the audiences of that time.

Here is the first NY Philharmonic program. All but one are dead (or long inactive) composers. All but one are works that had already earned a place on the concert stage. The Kalliwoda overture was commissioned for this concert.

1842 Dec 07

Beethoven / Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67
Weber / Oberon: "Ozean, du Ungeheuer" (Ocean, thou mighty monster), Reiza (Scene and Aria), Act II
Hummel / Quintet in D minor, Op. 74

Intermission

Weber / Oberon: Overture
Rossini / Armida: Duet
Beethoven / Fidelio: "In Des Lebens Fruhlingstagen...O spur ich nicht linde," Florestan (aria)
Mozart / Die Entfuhrung aus dem Serail , K. 384 : "Ach Ich liebte," Konstanze (aria)
Kalliwoda / Overture No. 1 in D minor, Op. 38

None of them present an idiom that is an utter departure and abandonment of historic practices.

I'm not saying utter departure and abandonment is bad... I'm saying it has never been the rule for orchestral concert programs for which tickets needed to be sold.

The idea that orchestras back then were constantly plowing through heaps of unknown composers to only occasionally find a gem among the rubble is a modern narrative created to cast modern audiences as somehow less tolerant than those of yore.

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2026 1:12 pm**

robcat2075 wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 12:54 pm The idea that orchestras back then were constantly plowing through heaps of unknown composers to only occasionally find a gem among the rubble is a modern narrative created to cast modern audiences as somehow less tolerant than those of yore.

I guess I'm sheltered - I've never heard this "modern narrative."

I have been fortunate to have been exposed to some wonderful music (and some that's merely intriguing) that's outside the "mainstream" - but it's rare, especially on "subscription concerts."

For international orchestras (fortunately many visit us here in Southern California), it's common for them to perform a less-well-known work from their country's composers. These are welcome, and sometimes very rewarding.

Posted: **Fri Apr 03, 2026 12:59 am**

I had the pleasure tonight of attending a Dallas Symphony Orchestra concert in a good concert hall.
[Segerstrom Concert Hall, Costa Mesa, CA]
Program was pure "western canon" -

Schumann Piano Concerto (with a last-minute sub pianist)

Mahler Symphony #4

The performance was spectacular, and received multiple ovations. The DSO, conducted by Fabio Luisi, is world class, as are many of their (mostly on the younger side) members.

Robcat, and anyone else living in the Dallas area, is lucky to have such an ensemble to enjoy.
I don't care if there wasn't anything "new" to hear - there's nothing like wonderful music, performed live by excellent musicians, to stir the soul. I'll sleep well tonight!

Posted: **Fri Apr 03, 2026 5:59 am**

robcat2075 wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 12:54 pm The idea that orchestras back then were constantly plowing through heaps of unknown composers to only occasionally find a gem among the rubble is a modern narrative created to cast modern audiences as somehow less tolerant than those of yore.

Until you go back far enough:

8c395284-f8cb-4574-9c24-1d07c0574fd6_text.gif

I'm fairly certain that Amadeus is 100% factual

... Almost as if they had cameras to film what was going on in the 1700s. Brand new stuff would get performed every time, and then get immediate expert critical feedback. To the point where most new music was just thrown away after one performance.

Posted: **Fri Apr 03, 2026 8:52 am**

According to the Grout "History of Western Music", by looking through the programs of the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra, we discover that:

1780s, 85 percent of pieces by living composers
1870, 75 percent of repertoire is by composers of past generations

And that by 1900:

musical classics dominated almost every field, core repertoire same throughout Europe and the Americas
opera: Mozart through Wagner, Verdi, Bizet
orchestral and chamber: Haydn through late Romantics
keyboard: J. S. Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, prominent nineteenth-century composers

So the idea that it's just in the 20th century and later that scary new music sent audiences running to the classics is not historically accurate.

Posted: **Fri Apr 03, 2026 2:23 pm**

Slight tangent, call me on it if too far afield: Are there any good statistics showing a correlation between playing an orchestral instrument (regardless of for how long or well) and attending orchestral concerts?

Anyhere I have been recently (last 10 years) - Pittsburgh, Chicago, Kalamazoo, South Bend - the audience is largely people in their 60s and up, not sure whether these people are former orchestral-instrument players, were exposed to orchestral music in schools, consider attending part of "good tone," or lack the fitness for pickleball...

Other than a smattering of young people on dates, that's who attends the concerts I go to.

Posted: **Fri Apr 03, 2026 2:31 pm**

JTeagarden wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2026 2:23 pm Anywhere [orchestra concerts] I have been recently ... the audience is largely people in their 60s and up ...

Other than a smattering of young people on dates, that's who attends the concerts I go to.

That's generally true everywhere - Europe as well as U.S.A.
But I enjoy encountering the exceptions - younger folks who just love live music!

Posted: **Wed Apr 15, 2026 10:02 am**

Posaunus wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 1:12 pm
robcat2075 wrote: Thu Apr 02, 2026 12:54 pm The idea that orchestras back then were constantly plowing through heaps of unknown composers to only occasionally find a gem among the rubble is a modern narrative created to cast modern audiences as somehow less tolerant than those of yore.
I guess I'm sheltered - I've never heard this "modern narrative."

That thesis has been voiced on this very forum.

I've been following new music (it used to be call "contemporary music") for more than 50 years now. In the many discussions, articles, panels, histories, op-eds, etc that i've encountered, when the problem of modern audience's lack of enthusiasm for modern music comes up, three talking points are repeatedly deployed.

Audiences used to demand new and unfamiliar music. (the above theory)

Audiences were just as dismissive of Beethoven, Rossini, etc. in their time. (Arnold Schoenberg)

Audiences are uneducated. (Charles Wuorinen)

We could debate whether any of those are true, but notice that the talking point goal is always to blame the audience. I've never seen anyone admit to the possibility that just MAYBE the new music is not as interesting. It is always postulated that the bonks, bleeps and bloops we just heard have the same merit as Beethoven... or more!

Posted: **Sat May 09, 2026 2:12 pm**

Posaunus wrote: Fri Apr 03, 2026 12:59 am I had the pleasure tonight of attending a Dallas Symphony Orchestra concert in a good concert hall.
[Segerstrom Concert Hall, Costa Mesa, CA]
Program was pure "western canon" -
Schumann Piano Concerto (with a last-minute sub pianist)

Mahler Symphony #4
The performance was spectacular, and received multiple ovations. The DSO, conducted by Fabio Luisi, is world class, as are many of their (mostly on the younger side) members.

Robcat, and anyone else living in the Dallas area, is lucky to have such an ensemble to enjoy.

You're right!

There's no reason they should not be talked about as a first-tier orchestra.
Unfortunately, by the time they got into the game with a first class concert hall built for them in Dallas (1989), the "canon" of great American orchestras had already been set in critics' minds and then not long after that, an orchestra being a notable presence in the recording field became a non-thing.

TromboneChat

Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon

Re: Infographic: Symphonies of the Western Canon