# Great Masters and todays classical composers



## sree (May 31, 2009)

Hi,

Most of us do have a big list of classical music audio collections of great masters and your favorites.And at the same time many do have videos of classical music performances. To increase the collection we do buy new audio cd/dvds releated to great classical composers. 
1. But how many people do really interest in buying cds/dvds of todays classical composers?
2. Who are your todays favorite classical composers? and why?


Cheers!!!


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Seeking out the best of today's "classical" composers can be far more challenging than seeking out the best of past masters for the very fact that the music has not had time to be digested and absorbed by the culture. We can go to Beethoven or Mozart with a degree of certainty that their music has survived where other "also rans" have faded from history because it has continued to resonate and inspire generations of subsequent musicians and educated music lovers. Still... we cannot live in the past and so we should seek out what contemporary composers have to offer. Some we will love. Some we will hate. Some will just leave us indifferent. Among the living composers I have found most interesting I would include Arvo Part, Philip Glass, Alberto Ginastera, Ned Rorem, Hans Werner Henze, Einojuhani Rautavaara, Sofia Gubaidulina, Wojciech Kilar, Henryk Górecki, Krzysztof Penderecki, Alfred Schnittke, Terry Riley, John Adams, William Bolcom, John Corigliano, John Tavener, Daniel Catan, Tan Dun, James MacMillan, Osvaldo Golijov, Erkki-Sven Tüür, Thomas Adès, and undoubtedly many more. Why do I recommend these composers? Because for whatever reason they resonated for me. Some are minimalists (such as Glass, Adams, Part), others are polystylists... all over the musical spectrum... such as Golijov and Bolcom, Rorem I find to be a marvelous songwriter, Catan has seduced me with two marvelously sensual operas... others, such as Tan Dun are quite experimental... but again all of them had the ability to peak my interest.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I buy contemporary composers once in a while. Usually I have to preview them on the radio or on YouTube to make that leap of faith.

I became interested in *Tobias Picker* after hearing _The Encantadas _(for narrator and orchestra) some years ago on the radio. It uses Herman Melville prose set to music, but reminds of an orchestral version of some of the poetry slams I used to frequent at coffee houses.

*Michael Daugherty* came to my attention when I processed a check from the university where I work, paying him for a commissioned piece for one of our chamber groups. Naturally I had to investigate his other work. I enjoy his piece called _Philadelphia Stories _, but I must say _UFO_ I find grating because it uses a police siren 

I am also quite fascinated by *Peter Schickele*. Having grown up seeing his P.D.Q. Bach performances on variety shows, I pigeonholed him as a goofball entertainer, not realizing people are more than one dimensional, and that he is well capable of writing serious compositions. (My university commissioned him also.) Though I have not bought it yet, I am looking into an album by the Lark Quartet of some of his chamber pieces, by way of penance.


----------



## The Cosmos (Oct 2, 2009)

I do like quite a few of the composers mentioned by StlukesguildOhio as well . The last modern composer I tried was Conlon Nancarrow, and this was only a few days back. Don't really know what to think of him yet (although there won't be too much of repeated plays ). A lot of experimentation for the sake of it. (Is it a good or a bad thing, is upto the listener to decide)


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

The Cosmos said:


> A lot of experimentation for the sake of it. (Is it a good or a bad thing, is upto the listener to decide)


Rhythmically astonishing! I'm afraid he loses me precisely in the middle of the piece for a stretch, but then pulls it together again toward the end. I'll have to check out more by this composer. He out Zappa's Zappa.


----------



## Cortision (Aug 4, 2009)

I have just recently begun to be interested in contemporary composers. The ones that have caught my attention so far are Arvo Part and Phillip Glass. Interestingly they are both classed as 'minimalists' although they have very different styles. Part calls his current style 'tintinabulation' or the ringing of bells. It is music that has a peaceful simplicity and beauty that is quite unique. Phillip Glass, on the other hand, has a rythmic drive in his music which I have heard described as 'rock n rolly'. He can be repetitive, but I find his violin concerto, particularly the second movement, very compelling. I will probably explore Gorecki or John Taverner next.

It seems to me that many contemporary composers have begun to turn their back on the more extreme violence, dissonance and angst that the 20th Century has come to represent (particularly Post World War Two), while still sounding very modern. If I am right about this, I think it is a good thing on the whole. I don't believe a composer should have to be experimental, avant garde or serialist in order to say something fresh and unique. All they need to do is find their own unique style, which is what composers like Rachmaninoff, Ralph Vaughn-Williams, Mozart, Brahms and many other greats have always done. Great innovators such as Beethoven, Wagner and Debussy may pave the way to new styles and forms, but that was only a part, not the whole, of their genius. Hopefully 'being new for the sake of being new' will end up being just a 20th century phenomenon.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

In the past year since I've started collecting, I've developed a liking for post WW2 composers. Of the ones alive today, I particularly like Henze, Gubaidulina, Part, Gorecki, Penderecki, Carter, and some Australian composers like Peter Sculthorpe. I've also listened to some more little known composers, like Chinese American Huang Ruo.

My knowledge of music is still limited to what I can buy on budget labels & hear on the radio. I think contemporary composers are the most interesting because they are building upon many centuries of classical music tradition. In contrast to some above, I like experimentation for it's own sake. It's often more interesting than simply adhering to classical traditions. As long as it's done in an intelligent, absorbing and engaging way, then I'm interested.

I'm a bit bemused by people who dismiss post WW2 music as rubbish (like the former member Mirror Image). I think it's strange if someone who is living in the Twenty First century can't appreciate something that was written in, say, the 1950's. I think it just shows an unwillingness to develop one's perception and flexibility. People like this just want the composer to put everything for them on a plate, for it to be easily digestible. But so many masterpieces of the post WW2 era where really meant for repeated listening. I've recently been enjoying Elliot Carter's string quartets & come to realise how important this is. Such works were not meant just to be superficially listened to, they were meant to be absorbed repeatedly. That's the only way, in most cases, one will understand the works written in the past 60 or so years...


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> ...Still... we cannot live in the past and so we should seek out what contemporary composers have to offer...


I agree with this, appreciating & understanding contemporary music enriches our experience of past masterpieces as well, and vice-versa...


----------



## nimmysnv (Oct 1, 2009)

Andre said:


> I agree with this, appreciating & understanding contemporary music enriches our experience of past masterpieces as well, and vice-versa...


Hi,

I totally agree with you as, contemporary style of music is very beautiful and it is a retreat of modernism as it is trully enriched with the masterpieces.

Contemporary music touches your soul deeply and if it is with a blend of ballad than it is trully sensational.

Thanks!!


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

sree said:


> Hi,
> 
> Most of us do have a big list of classical music audio collections of great masters and your favorites.And at the same time many do have videos of classical music performances. To increase the collection we do buy new audio cd/dvds releated to great classical composers.
> 1. But how many people do really interest in buying cds/dvds of todays classical composers?
> ...


For me modern music of the last 100 years or more hasn't been about discovering the modern 'masters' but about just enjoying the variety and huge number of composers who have produced interesting music. I don't think it's worthwhile just concentrating on a few composers.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I'm a bit bemused by people who dismiss post WW2 music as rubbish (like the former member Mirror Image). I think it's strange if someone who is living in the Twenty First century can't appreciate something that was written in, say, the 1950's.

Someone on another musical discussion group pointed out that music... like any art form... is a language... and it is necessary to understand the language in order to fully appreciate it... and yet few of us have mastered every language. There are some here, undoubtedly, who have never come to understand opera. It is completely foreign to them. I don't speak French. Listening to it I may find that at times it has a and or a cadence that I find attractive, but in order to fully understand or appreciate it takes an investment of time, effort... and even money.

I came from a background where the music I heard frequently was rock, bluegrass, and the hymns and other music played in the Lutheran church. As a result I found that I could grasp Baroque music with its steady driving rhythms and even forms such as the cantata and lieder before I could grasp the broader forms of opera, sweeping Romanticism, to say nothing of Modernism and Atonalism. Today I can appreciate a broad array of musical forms including "classical" music from the middle ages to the present, jazz, Middle-Eastern, Japanese, Celtic, Bluegrass (real bluegrass and not that "country" that is really no more than pop crap with a southern accent), even some rock... but I will admit I am still not overly fond of atonalism, Chinese music, and any number of other forms. They never attracted me enough so that I was willing to put forth the effort involved into understanding them better.

Ultimately the appreciation of all music... all art involves such an investment... and we either feel that the investment is worth the time... or we look elsewhere. In many ways, Bach is no more immediately accessible than Ligetti. I personally have a broad musical taste. Others chose depth over breadth. Our former member Mirror Image, for example, chose to delve deeper and deeper into Romanticism and Post-Romanticism... into second- and third-tier composers and into multiple interpretations of the same work, where another might elect to go off seeking gratification in another musical realm: the 18th century, the baroque, the middle-ages, contemporary, etc... Having collected classical music for some time now and having the wherewithal... or rather placing my priorities upon art and music and literature as opposed to cars and McMansions I have been able to develop a broad collection of music that has a degree of depth as well... although I doubt I might rival the medievalist with regard to medieval music or the baroque specialist with regard to the baroque.

Again... I personally feel that we cannot live (fully) in the past and so we should seek out what contemporary composers have to offer... but I will acknowledge that others may not feel the way and I'm not about to underestimate their knowledge or appreciation of classical music simply because they have never come around to appreciate opera, Schubert's lieder, Golijov, Arvo Part, or Philip Glass... or to recognize that fact that J.S. Bach is God!


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

For me modern music of the last 100 years or more hasn't been about discovering the modern 'masters' but about just enjoying the variety and huge number of composers who have produced interesting music. I don't think it's worthwhile just concentrating on a few composers.

Indeed... the nearer music... or any art... is to us in time, the more difficult it is to judge and to discern what is truly "original" and of lasting quality, from what is merely "interesting" (or even merely "novel") but perhaps little more than a period piece. The past is far easier to judge because others... subsequent composers and music lovers... the culture as a whole... have digested and absorbed the work and the strongest survives. There are Modern and Contemporary composers that I suspect of being really important. At times I find that my choices coincide with broader opinions... at times not. The fact is that history is full of examples of artists being proclaimed as the "masters of their time" who eventually faded into obscurity while virtual unknowns rose to ever more prominence. In a culture in which we are forever bombarded with promotions for this or that artist... when so much money rides upon sustaining the reputation of a given artist... I am somewhat reluctant to apply the term "master" to any artist from the last 50 or 75 years too freely.


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

There is certainly much comtemporary music that is good...perhaps great...but I find that much modern-day classical music is bad and gimmicky.

There is a lot of drive to create music that no one has ever heard before, I think. To be as original and "groundbreaking" as possible. In so doing, I think we end up with a lot of novelty of dubious (or non-existant) quality.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

> but I find that much modern-day classical music is bad and gimmicky


Agreed. Where did the actually emotional art go?


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

Lukecash12 said:


> Agreed. Where did the actually emotional art go?


It's old fashioned! And we all know a good tune, lushly orchestrated is the sign of a backwards, useless composer nowadays. In order to make it, you have to notate your work in a silly, impracticle way and make sure it sounds like a WWI era tank driving through a thrift shop with the emergency break on. Assuming such hardware had an emergency by the way.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

I don't really much agree with that. I still write music that is plenty good, and it ranges anywhere from Classical to Romantic to Impressionistic to Decadent. And there is quite a bit of room left for ingenuity in the Avante Garde genre.


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent (Feb 28, 2008)

I am usually afraid to listen to new composers. I don't know why, but when I see anything new when it comes movies/music/art, I am always disappointed. Is it because I like the way things from the past are? So guys I would appreciate it if you would post clips of compositions of these new composers. I want to be a composer so I would like to hear the music of my contemporaries. I want to be convinced, if you all could do that, I will be exposed to a new frontier of music.


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

I think there is as much good music being created today as there was at any point in time, it's just that the sieve of time hasn't had chance to separate the wheat from the chaff yet. I may not have heard a lot of this good music yet but I am sure it exists and will come to the forefront in the future.

As for 'modern' composers I really like Terry Riley and many of the other 'minimalists'( Glass, Reich, even some Branca and Young). I do come from a rock background,though, so I am well and truly used to repetition. 

I feel there needs to continue to be experimentation in new music especially with regards to electronics and effects to provide new timbres and colours. The work of guys like Klaus Schulze, Edgar Froese, Brian Eno and Robert Fripp in creating new soundscapes didn't really influence the classical world but rather got absorbed into 80's new wave and synth pop.

I will admit, however, that most of my recent purchases are pre-1980's and that includes rock, jazz, blues etc or new recordings of old pieces. The question is wether it's worth investing all that time and effort listening to all new artists, to find maybe one good piece of music out of a hundred, or to search into the past and exhaust the catalogues of well established greats. As an amateur composer/musician myself I feel it is necessary to keep up with current trends but not at the price of neglecting the past.


----------



## Guest (Oct 18, 2009)

Several people have mentioned time, time and culture. Two things that can separate the worthwhile from the worthless, or at least the less worthy.

One person's exact words were "Seeking out the best of today's 'classical' composers can be far more challenging than seeking out the best of past masters for the very fact that the music has not had time to be digested and absorbed by the culture."

This is a very common notion, and all I can say is that I have found for myself that all I need to do is digest and absorb for myself. I don't need the culture to do it for me, nor do I need any more time to pass than the time it takes to play the piece.

Contemporary music has been for a long time described as something difficult, something challenging, something that's not for everyone. Well, one out of three, maybe. And at the worst, it's been described as bad and gimmicky and novelty of dubious value. Well, in my experience, and I'm not alone in this!, it's none of those things. For me, the musics of the past century and of the past nine years, have been a perpetual delight, engaging and inviting and exhilarating. To name names, I'm talking about the music of people like Varese and Xenakis and Stockhausen and Cage and Karkowski and Groult and Mumma and Lachenmann and Oliveros and Goeringer. People like Masami Akita and Christian Marclay. These may put some listeners off. But some does not equal all. And some of us (some others of us, I should say!) find these people's music to be pleasant and emotionally satisfying.

If you do not find them to be so, fine. Just don't conclude from your impressions that they are therefore NOT emotionally satisfying. My experience alone would be enough to give the lie to that hasty conclusion!!


----------

