# Composers that should be famous but aren't?



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

There's nothing more disheartening to me than finding a composer I like who wrote lots, but for whatever reason just int widely recorded, so I thought I'd ask which composers you think belong in this category? They don't have to have written lots, just not many recordings by. Scriabin when I first started listening to him, there was hardly anything recorded by.


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

Ernst Krenek, famous but not nearly as famous as he should be. 

Max Reger also seems to be one that I always find myself feeling disappointed at his standing. 

I've been getting into Biber lately as well and I'm also unhappy with how ignored considering his highly expressive, beautifully crafted music. 

I could name many others, as this feeling that great minds are not often getting their due, both in the present and the past, is something that I have think about frequently.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

CPE Bach, Schnittke, Boccherini, Biber, and Corelli come to mind. They were probably more famous during their day but forgotten through history.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

It's a hard one perhaps more famous or better known is what you should have said. After all many of these people have been dead quite some time, the fact anyone knows their name signals some sort of fame however minor.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Frank Zappa and Charles Ives totally. Also Yuki Kajiura, Nobuo Uematsu, Hitoshi Sakimoto, Masashi Hamauzu, Koji Kondo. Also also Alfred Schnittke.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Frank Zappa is a household name, but I'm not sure how many people think of him as a composer? Charles Ives certainly deserves to be better known than John Williams.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Of Australian composers, the late *Richard Meale *springs to mind. As good as Sculthorpe (some say Meale is better) but he hasn't gotten the recognition - esp. overseas - that I think he deserves. Meale was abit like our own Stravinsky, a musical chameleon, changing directions quite a few times, yet still retaining this unique vision and individual voice.

I agree re Ives and to a certain extent about Reger as well. I was recently talking to an American here, who actually came from Ives stomping ground, Connecticut. I asked this person had they heard of Ives - I drew a total blank. Yet when I mentioned Gershwin, of course she knew him. I'm not degrading Gershwin just saying how it surprised me that Ives is, judging by this, relatively unknown in his own country.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

I would like Cherubini to get more recognition. The same goes for Honegger and Roussel. They should be much closer to the standard repertoire, in my opinion.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Sid James said:


> Of Australian composers, the late *Richard Meale *springs to mind. As good as Sculthorpe (some say Meale is better) but he hasn't gotten the recognition - esp. overseas - that I think he deserves. Meale was abit like our own Stravinsky, a musical chameleon, changing directions quite a few times, yet still retaining this unique vision and individual voice.
> 
> I agree re Ives and to a certain extent about Reger as well. I was recently talking to an American here, who actually came from Ives stomping ground, Connecticut. I asked this person had they heard of Ives - I drew a total blank. Yet when I mentioned Gershwin, of course she knew him. I'm not degrading Gershwin just saying how it surprised me that Ives is, judging by this, relatively unknown in his own country.


Yeah, most Americans don't know Ives. To me its like Germans not knowing Beethoven. But then again American culture doesn't cultivate alot of respect for the arts.


----------



## Il_Penseroso (Nov 20, 2010)

André Grétry


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Luigi Legnani, Ruth Crawford-Seeger, Louise Farrenc.


----------



## mensch (Mar 5, 2012)

Charles-Valentin Alkan, stylistically he falls between Chopin and Liszt. His piano output is very good and not often recorded.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

C.M. von Weber.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Claudio Rinaldo Armani-Presto


----------



## Nadia (Jul 29, 2012)

Sergei Lyapunov! His piano works are stunning, and by that I don't mean the Transcendentals only, he has many lesser known piano pieces that are better than the Transcendentals! But I'm biased because he is my favorite composer.

And there is Reinhold Gliere: He composed many, many great works, yet I only hear the coloratura concerto and the harp concerto preformed. Sopranos use the concerto as a show off piece, even if they are not coloraturas in the full meaning of the word. (I wouldn't classify Netrebko as a coloratura probably a darker lyric or a spinto)


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

starthrower said:


> Frank Zappa is a household name, but I'm not sure how many people think of him as a composer?


As a composer of classical music, not many.

I've been a member of various classical music forums for about 7 years and I have only very rarely come across his name being mentioned as a possible composer of classical music, in all cases getting short shrift in the process. It's only here that a small coterie of fans seem intent on pushing his credentials in this regard, and it has only occurred very recently.

Even among music forums which are more avowedly rock oriented, Zappa's name is not among the all-time top echelons of rock music, and he doesn't appear to be regarded as having been all that highly influential in any of the genres in which he participated.

What little of his music I've heard sounds OK but I wouldn't rate it beyond "average". In my opinion there are far better rock artists than Zappa ever was.


----------



## Jem (Aug 1, 2012)

Ahmet Adnan Saygun, Turkish Composer (1907-1991). Studied with D'Indy and helped Bartok with his ethnomusicological survey of Turkey. HIs music is a combination of traditionally Turkish songs and Western, quite neoclassical musical practices.He wrote five symphonies, five operas, two piano concertos, and chamber and choral works. 

Carlos Chavez, Mexican (1899-1978). I played one of his pieces once and was struck by the intensity and weight of his scoring. His music fused Mexican, indigenous Indian, and Spanish-Mexican. A really user-friendly Second Symphony (about 16 mins longs) full of colour and Latin melodies and percussion - I think Dudamel and the Bolivars played it a bit. The rest of his stuff is quite atavistic and full of polyrhythms, cross-rhythms, syncopation.

Check out Nikos Skalkottas (1904 - 1948) if you're into Second Viennese School with Greek bits...


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

Some truly first-rate composers to whom luck, tradition and 'fashion' have not been kind:

Renaissance:
Luzzaschi
Ockeghem

Baroque:
Biber
Caldara
Geminiani
Locatelli
Monteverdi (this composer can NEVER be famous enough)
Pandolfi (-Meali)
Schütz
Stradella

Baroque/Classical transition:
CPE Bach
Hasse
Jommelli
Piccini
Carl Stamitz

Classical:
Kraus
Krommer
Myslíveček
Wesley

Classical/Romantic transition:
Cherubini
Clementi
Gossec
Hummel
Méhul
Reicha
Voříšek

Romantic:
Gade
Godard
Kallinnikov
Lyadov
Lyapunov
Onslow
Pfitzner
Schmidt
Schmitt
Spohr


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

Jem said:


> Check out Nikos Skalkottas (1904 - 1948) if you're into Second Viennese School with Greek bits...


Absolutely. A very interesting composer with high talent. I'm optimistic his popualrity will grow.

I started collecting his material earlier this year. I've acquired quite a bit so far including two concertos (AK 14 & AK 16); several chamber works (AK 30, 32 and AK 69 are very good); various orchestral works (36 Greek Dances, Orchestration of Mitropoulos, The Sea for Orchestra); several piano sonatas; the ballet score (The Maiden and Death, amusingly using the reverse name of Schubert's piece).


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> Yeah, most Americans don't know Ives. To me its like Germans not knowing Beethoven. But then again American culture doesn't cultivate alot of respect for the arts.


Americans don't know anything that hasn't been assimilated into pop culture. Of the staggering number of great artists this country has produced over the past 100 years, most of them are anonymous to the public. Take Louis Armstrong for example. His jazz innovations are largely unknown compared to his pop hit Hello Dolly.

But what more can you expect from a country of 300 million whose government devotes a paltry 175 million for the National Endowment For The Arts. And even this tiny sum is under attack from right wing politicians and religious fanatic groups.

World renowned jazz vocalist (he's a true jazz vocalist and improviser, not a tin pan alley singer) Mark Murphy is from my hometown of Syracuse, NY. Nobody here knows who he is. Sad!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Very Senior Member said:


> As a composer of classical music, not many.
> 
> I've been a member of various classical music forums for about 7 years and I have only very rarely come across his name being mentioned as a possible composer of classical music, in all cases getting short shrift in the process. It's only here that a small coterie of fans seem intent on pushing his credentials in this regard, and it has only occurred very recently.
> 
> ...


That's what I appreciate! An opinion based on extremely limited listening, exposure, and knowledge of an artist's work. Maybe these people on rock forums know something that Boulez, the London Symphony, Zubin Mehta, the late Nicolas Slonimsky, Kent Nagano, Jean Luc Ponty, and many more of the world's top musicians don't?


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Delicious Manager said:


> Some truly first-rate composers to whom luck, tradition and 'fashion' have not been kind:
> 
> Renaissance:
> Luzzaschi
> ...


What about the 20th Century? I forgot about Poulenc and Respighi. Both very unknown. And of course Ligeti is known but not known enough.


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

Very Senior Member said:


> As a composer of classical music, not many.
> 
> I've been a member of various classical music forums for about 7 years and I have only very rarely come across his name being mentioned as a possible composer of classical music, in all cases getting short shrift in the process. It's only here that a small coterie of fans seem intent on pushing his credentials in this regard, and it has only occurred very recently.
> 
> ...


There is nothing "average" or below average about Frank Zappa. Have you ever really listened to him? Hot Rats is one of the best rock/fusion albums ever made. I know many people don't get Zappa and just look at him as bizarre but when you question them as to how much of his music they are acquainted with it turns out they know little to none. I won't defend all of his music because like any composer he turned out compositions that I personally don't care for. Zappa was a genius who took rock music into realms that were unknown at the time. He opened up my mind to the possibilities of rock music, which led me into jazz and classical. Average he was not!

Kevin


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

To put this simply and succinctly: *All the Russian composers need to get out of Russia. All of them.*

There are so many composers that I've fallen in love with from Russia, and from lots of research I have discovered that they do quite well in their home country today, even the smaller "silver" ones. But they are close to unheard-of outside Russia, and this isn't because they aren't good composers. It's because their musical heritage was for many decades blocked off and repelled by the rest of the musical community. Shostakovich and Prokofiev were lucky to get out of Russia more and connect with Europe/US, but people like Glinka, Balakirev, Glazunov, Gliere, Arensky, S. Taneyev, and many more got overshadowed. A lot of it is due to the sudden changes in Russia, which possibly made Nationalist Russian music repulsive to the rest of the world for a time, and since it couldn't be twisted for other patriotic ends (ex. Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture).

Who knows? If I was living around the 1950s and was as passionate about Russian music as I am now, would I be called a Communist?

Behind the Iron Curtain, Soviet musicians performed almost all the music of the Silver Age of Russian music, besides everything there is of the Golden Age, and yet it's difficult to get those performances/recordings out into the public. It's getting better, but so much of the issue is simple ignorance (not the evil kind but the accidental kind). The US is obsessed with Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff since they connect to our heritage, and famous American musicians of the past championed their works, but few thought to champion any of the rest. Some of the smallest and inconsequential French and German and English composers have been well championed by musicians of western Europe and the US, even if they made much less music than the Russian composers, and so they are known on this side of the world.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

starthrower said:


> That's what I appreciate! An opinion based on extremely limited listening, exposure, and knowledge of an artist's work. Maybe these people on rock forums know something that Boulez, the London Symphony, Zubin Mehta, the late Nicolas Slonimsky, Kent Nagano, Jean Luc Ponty, and many more of the world's top musicians don't?


I expect that from you as part of the small coterie of Zappa supporters on here right now. Have you ever wondered why this Forum has been going for some 7 years now and there's hardly been the slightest notice taken of Zappa, whether as a rock composer or anything else he may have composed.

To answer your question about the relative weight I attach to the combined opinions expressed on all the main classical music forums versus the name-dropped list you plucked out of the air above, I would unhesitatingly go with the the former. You have not provided one shred of eviidence that would stand scrutiny merely by listing a few names.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

BurningDesire said:


> Frank Zappa and Charles Ives totally. Also Yuki Kajiura, Nobuo Uematsu, Hitoshi Sakimoto, Masashi Hamauzu, Koji Kondo. Also also Alfred Schnittke.


i was thinking that Schnittke would probably nominate Alemndar Karamanov.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> What about the 20th Century? I forgot about Poulenc and Respighi. Both very unknown. And of course Ligeti is known but not known enough.


Poulenc, Respighi and *Ligeti* are far better known than even CPE Bach. I would say maybe Rodrigo is less well known than those three and more of his works deserve a bit more recognition.


----------



## Rinaldino (Aug 2, 2012)

Skalkottas is a genius and his work simply deserves better recognition. Ditto for Ginastera and Imbrie. Going a little back, I think Kraus, Zelenka, Biber and Arriaga should all get more recordings. However, the most neglected group of composers of all time is made up of Italian instrumental music authors of the fascist era. Respighi, Casella, Malipiero, Dallapiccola, Petrassi and Ghedini are little known just because of politics, but at least three of them have written masterworks.

P.S. Respighi is indeed famous, but I think the majority of his oeuvre is still strongly unacknowledged.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Rinaldino said:


> Skalkottas is a genius and his work simply deserves better recognition. Ditto for Ginastera and Imbrie. Going a little back, I think Kraus, Zelenka, Biber and Arriaga should all get more recordings. However, the most neglected group of composers of all time is made up of Italian instrumental music authors of the fascist era. Respighi, Casella, Malipiero, Dallapiccola, Petrassi and Ghedini are little known just because of politics, but at least three of them have written masterworks.
> 
> P.S. Respighi is indeed famous, but I think the majority of his oeuvre is still strongly unacknowledged.


I would add Ennio Porrino to your list, who is today largely forgotten for the same reasons.
And another russian composer that i find really interesting is Alexander Lokshin.


----------



## Rinaldino (Aug 2, 2012)

norman bates said:


> I would add Ennio Porrino to your list.


Unforturtunately I don't know his music enough to form an opinion about him. ):


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Rinaldino said:


> Unforturtunately I don't know his music enough to form an opinion about him. ):


Shardana is a great opera for me, unfortunately is not so easy to find but it's not impossible.
Anyway, what are the masterpieces you were talking about? I've never heard Ghedini before, but i really like the few works of Petrassi i know (in a sense his style reminds me of Porrino, but the two composers were friends if i remember well), like Noche oscura.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Very Senior Member said:


> I expect that from you as part of the small coterie of Zappa supporters on here right now. Have you ever wondered why this Forum has been going for some 7 years now and there's hardly been the slightest notice taken of Zappa, whether as a rock composer or anything else he may have composed.
> 
> To answer your question about the relative weight I attach to the combined opinions expressed on all the main classical music forums versus the name-dropped list you plucked out of the air above, I would unhesitatingly go with the the former. You have not provided one shred of eviidence that would stand scrutiny merely by listing a few names.


Sorry, but 1 trained musician who's studied and learned music, trumps 1000 listeners with no real experience beyond the passive. You have no evidence whatsoever, just judgments made in ignorance, following the ignorant herd. He named real musicians who actually know what they're talking about.


----------



## Rinaldino (Aug 2, 2012)

norman bates said:


> Shardana is a great opera for me, unfortunately is not so easy to find but it's not impossible.
> Anyway, what are the masterpieces you were talking about? I've never heard Ghedini before, but i really like the few works of Petrassi i know (in a sense his style reminds me of Porrino, but the two composers were friends if i remember well), like Noche oscura.


Ghedini is not a major composer, but he's indeed a pleasure to listen to. He had a strong sense of lyrism and orchestrated with parsimony and efficiency. You can find on YT some works of his... I recommend the "Musica concertante per violoncello e archi". (Is it permitted to link directly to YT videos that violate copyright laws in this forum?)
Respighi's modal works, Dallapiccola and Malipiero are the big name on the list in my opinion, immediately followed by Casella and Petrassi. The latter's Concerti per orchestra are a must have in my opinion: they span 40 years of the composer's career and represent a nice example of the evolution of his style. Casella is now noted just as a skilled piano teacher, but his "Concerto per archi, pianoforte, timpani e batteria op. 69" is a genius work according to me. It's like a music version of Terragni's and Moretti's rationalistic architectures of the period. His piano "Sonatina" is also quite charming.
Respighi piano and violin concerti (respectively "in modo misolidio" and "Concerto gregoriano") are marvellous work with wonderful orchestration. La fiamma is a very interesting opera, too. I also recommend Sinfonia drammatica and Metamorphoseon.
Dallapiccola's Partita for orchestra and Canti di prigionia are maybe the best Italian "fascist" music had to offer. Malipiero wrote a lot of charming symphonies in a very personal style, but I would not overlook his string quartets. Anyway, that's just my opinion, I'm no expert.
P.S. Thanks for the suggestion about Porrino.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

thanks to you too for the recommendations. I'm very curious to listen to the Concerto per archi, because of your comparison with Terragni and Moretti.
By the way, yes you can link to YT




(Nibatta who posted this video is Giovanni Masala who is the person to contact in case you're interested in Porrino's music)


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

Nadia said:


> Sergei Lyapunov! His piano works are stunning, and by that I don't mean the Transcendentals only, he has many lesser known piano pieces that are better than the Transcendentals! But I'm biased because he is my favorite composer.
> 
> And there is Reinhold Gliere: He composed many, many great works, yet I only hear the coloratura concerto and the harp concerto preformed. Sopranos use the concerto as a show off piece, even if they are not coloraturas in the full meaning of the word. (I wouldn't classify Netrebko as a coloratura probably a darker lyric or a spinto)


I totally agree with you. But Lyapunov had other great and unknown works: his piano sextet and violin concerto are just beautiful. And all Gliere's chamber works are IMO some of the best Russian romantic music ever writen.


----------



## Rinaldino (Aug 2, 2012)

norman bates said:


> thanks to you too for the recommendations. I'm very curious to listen to the Concerto per archi, because of your comparison with Terragni and Moretti.
> By the way, yes you can link to YT
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you again. [In my opinion, my country's inability to confront the fascist period without blind abhorrence is a shame. A lot of great works have been produced in those twenty years in every art and not only they're being forgotten, but sometimes ruined or even destroyed, like Villa Oro by Cosenza in Naples or Villa Camilluccia in Rome by Luccichenti and Monaco, which no longer exists (it has been demolished].


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Sorry, but 1 trained musician who's studied and learned music, trumps 1000 listeners with no real experience beyond the passive.

Then by that standard I believe that the years of experience held by our VerySeniorMember trumps your childish enthusiasms.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Sorry, but 1 trained musician who's studied and learned music, trumps 1000 listeners with no real experience beyond the passive.
> 
> Then by that standard I believe that the years of experience held by our VerySeniorMember trumps your childish enthusiasms.


Ageism once again.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Ageism once again.

No. Nothing to do with age. One could surely be 110 and never have invested the least bit of effort into the serious study of music. On the other hand, if someone is going to claim that the experience and knowledge of Boulez and Kent Nagano and Zubin Mehta trump 1000 passive listeners, then it would seem likewise that the acquired experience of someone like VerySeniorMember trumps the relative inexperience of BurningDesire. You can't claim the greater worth of experience only when it supports your own personal opinions.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Rinaldino said:


> ...
> P.S. Respighi is indeed famous, but I think the majority of his oeuvre is still strongly unacknowledged.


Yes, I heard a cd containing an orchestral work called something like 'Metamorphosen' commissioned/written for the USA. On Chandos with Geoffrey Simon conducting, I think. I remember it as quite interesting and different from his other things (he's like a 'one hit wonder' composer for many people, well a few hits anyway, the 'Pines of Rome' and all that stuff). But this work appeard more unique and I'll have to hear it again.



ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> ... Ruth Crawford-Seeger,...


I think Elliott Carter listed her as a big influence, as well as guys like Ives of course. I am aiming to hear her music down the track. She is on Naxos, and that would be where I will go, when I do 'go.'



mensch said:


> Charles-Valentin Alkan, stylistically he falls between Chopin and Liszt. His piano output is very good and not often recorded.


Yeah but the reason is a lot to do how hard it is to perform his music. Even LIszt balked when he saw a score of Alkan's, apparently. But I agree his music is excellent and in some ways ahead of its time. There are some startling dissonances in his 'Esquisses' for example. But my favourite work is his 'Sonate les quatre ages.' Equal in quality to things like Liszt's B minor sonata, but of course quite different. I have been fortunate to hear Alkan's music performed live here. But unfortunatley its rare, not only as its very difficult for the pianist, but also it doesn't put bums on seats as much as things by other composers.



Jem said:


> ...
> Carlos Chavez, Mexican (1899-1978). I played one of his pieces once and was struck by the intensity and weight of his scoring. His music fused Mexican, indigenous Indian, and Spanish-Mexican. A really user-friendly Second Symphony (about 16 mins longs) full of colour and Latin melodies and percussion - I think Dudamel and the Bolivars played it a bit. The rest of his stuff is quite atavistic and full of polyrhythms, cross-rhythms, syncopation...


Indeed a very unique symphonist of 20th century. I have his 6 symphonies with Eduardo Mata conducting. He was quite the innovator for his time, well with the first 3 symphonies anyway. He was influenced by the three B's, esp. the last two, but in ways similar to the uniqueness of vision Sibelius had. I think Chavez was truly equal to the likes of Sibelius, and also an influence on American composers like Copland (they where friends). I agree he deserves recognition, he was a guy who put Mexico on the map in some ways (with that 2nd symphony, his most recorded), along with others like Revueltas.



> ...
> Check out Nikos Skalkottas (1904 - 1948) if you're into Second Viennese School with Greek bits...


Agreed, people forget that Schoenberg also had Skalkottas as a student as well as Hanns Eisler (maybe another composer for this thread, but I'm not that familiar with his work). So there were 5 (at least) in the 2nd Viennese School, Arnie and 4 students. I have some of Skalkottas chamber music on a vinyl LP. He comes across as quite similar to Berg, even incorporating things like Viennese waltzes into his music. Quite interesting, but that LP which has a set of variations for violin and piano and also his 3rd string quartet, is all I've heard so far. He had a tragic early death (about in his 40's) from a hernia. Very sad.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Me feels a head on collision train wreck coming. Better get out of the way...


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Well is VerySeniorMember a musician? a composer? a student of music history and theory and performance? 

I've always been struck by the irony involved in the manner in which students often presume to know so much more than their teachers, while at the same time over-inflating the merit of their formal education and its application to the real world. This applies to arts as much as it does anywhere else. In case you have not yet learned this fact, allow me to be the first to inform you that knowledge and experience is not the sole property of academia and a formal education. William Blake never attended grade school, let alone the university, yet I can assure you he was a far greater writer than any PhD. coming out of the creative writing departments and a far more innovative artist than any art school graduate student. Many of the greatest writers, artists, and musicians, had little or no formal schooling. This is equally true of critics. Two of the greatest elder English literary critics, William Hazlitt and Samuel Johnson had little formal education in literature. Hazlitt studied at a seminary school and Johnson was too poor to continue at the university beyond a single year. Northrop Frye, perhaps the most astute literary critic of the 20th century, studied theology and was ordained as a minister. It is not necessary to be a practicing painter or know how to mix colors and prime a canvas in order to be a discerning and insightful art critic, nor is it necessary to be a practicing musician or formally educated student of musicology to be an equally discerning critic of music. On the other hand... it is quite possible to be the most clever student and still be wholly clueless and/or tone-deaf.

...even if he was a studied musician, I doubt he can really hold a candle to Boulez or Xenakis or any of the others listed.

What you fail to grasp is that while you are citing the opinions of certain acclaimed musicians in support of your opinion, one might just as easily cite the opinions of equally acclaimed musicians who are of a contrary point of view.

But if he isn't, he's just a listener, then I'm sorry, but as a musician and composer and somebody who studies and takes this artform quite seriously, I think I hold a little more authority on the subject than somebody who only listens...

As I've already pointed out, I'm afraid you don't. Quite honestly, the weight or merit assigned to the opinions of individuals is something that is achieved over time... and as a result of your achievements and recognized/acknowledged abilities ... not that little diploma and neatly typed resume that you imagine will hold so much weight in the real world. I can assure you that comparing Charles Ives to Beethoven, dismissing Mozart as no better than dozens of second-rate composers of his time, and lauding the genius of Frank Zappa is not likely to lend much credence to anything else you might have to say.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Me feels a head on collision train wreck coming. Better get out of the way...


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Well is VerySeniorMember a musician? a composer? a student of music history and theory and performance?
> 
> I've always been struck by the irony involved in the manner in which students often presume to know so much more than their teachers, while at the same time over-inflating the merit of their formal education and its application to the real world. This applies to arts as much as it does anywhere else. In case you have not yet learned this fact, allow me to be the first to inform you that knowledge and experience is not the sole property of academia and a formal education. William Blake never attended grade school, let alone the university, yet I can assure you he was a far greater writer than any PhD. coming out of the creative writing departments and a far more innovative artist than any art school graduate student. Many of the greatest writers, artists, and musicians, had little or no formal schooling. This is equally true of critics. Two of the greatest elder English literary critics, William Hazlitt and Samuel Johnson had little formal education in literature. Hazlitt studied at a seminary school and Johnson was too poor to continue at the university beyond a single year. Northrop Frye, perhaps the most astute literary critic of the 20th century, studied theology and was ordained as a minister. It is not necessary to be a practicing painter or know how to mix colors and prime a canvas in order to be a discerning and insightful art critic, nor is it necessary to be a practicing musician or formally educated student of musicology to be an equally discerning critic of music. On the other hand... it is quite possible to be the most clever student and still be wholly clueless and/or tone-deaf.
> 
> ...


Not once have I presumed to know more than any of my teachers. I have great respect for all of my music professors. I'm also not over-inflating the worth of my education. Sure, there are fine examples of auto-didactic people who didn't need to be taught to create great things (for example, Frank Zappa), but that doesn't invalidate education, not everybody gets good at something just teaching themselves (how about Mozart, or Beethoven?). I disagree on the assertion that somebody can be a great critic without any experience in the field they criticize. If you have any examples of people who disagree on the quality of Frank Zappa's output, people who have serious authority, go ahead and name them. You really didn't provide any refutation to my authority on music, other than you disagree with my opinions and I'm young, and sorry, that doesn't really discount what I have to say.


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

I would tend to agree with those that mention CPE Bach, granted he didn't write as much as his father, but he still should be more popular today.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Me feels a head on collision train wreck coming. Better get out of the way...


Well the 'fallout' can be worse than the bomb itself...its a metaphor for...who gives a ****...


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Sure, there are fine examples of auto-didactic people who didn't need to be taught to create great things (for example, Frank Zappa), but that doesn't invalidate education...

Nor did I even begin to suggest as much. I am a product of academia myself. You will note what I did say was that "knowledge and experience is not the sole property of academia and a formal education."

not everybody gets good at something just teaching themselves (how about Mozart, or Beethoven?)...

Obviously. I know any number of talented individuals who are highly accomplished in their artistic field. Some have had the benefit of a formal academic education... some have not.

I disagree on the assertion that somebody can be a great critic without any experience in the field they criticize.

Again, I never suggested such... but the critics I mentioned all clearly attained their knowledge and experience of the field outside the structure of a formal academic education.

If you have any examples of people who disagree on the quality of Frank Zappa's output, people who have serious authority, go ahead and name them.

I am not interested enough in Frank Zappa (one way of the other) to invest such time digging through the internet to scrape up negative criticism of his work. I have little doubt that such exists, however. It is only logical. If there are negative criticisms from individuals we would consider of serious authority of Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, and Wagner (and their certainly are) then I have no doubt that Frank Zappa is not above such and universally admired. The only reason one might not come across such critical commentary more frequently is that he has never been considered by many important enough to care. Honestly, in the years that I have been at this site I have rarely encountered any serious discussion of Zappa. Indeed, I suspect his name has been bandied about more in the last month than in the last 5 years.

Having said that, I will admit to having a couple of Zappa's recordings. They are enjoyable... quirky... innovative in some ways... but certainly not something I'd place alongside Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner, or Stravinsky.

Your mileage may differ.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Very Senior Member said:


> I expect that from you as part of the small coterie of Zappa supporters on here right now. Have you ever wondered why this Forum has been going for some 7 years now and there's hardly been the slightest notice taken of Zappa, whether as a rock composer or anything else he may have composed.
> 
> To answer your question about the relative weight I attach to the combined opinions expressed on all the main classical music forums versus the name-dropped list you plucked out of the air above, I would unhesitatingly go with the the former. You have not provided one shred of eviidence that would stand scrutiny merely by listing a few names.


Once again you enjoy flaunting your ignorance concerning the subject at hand. Those names were not plucked out of the air. They are musicians, conductors, and a world class orchestra who worked with, and respected Zappa. Whether you are interested or not isn't the point. The point is you keep putting your foot in your mouth. Maybe you're experiencing some very senior moments?


----------



## Nadia (Jul 29, 2012)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> To put this simply and succinctly: *All the Russian composers need to get out of Russia. All of them.*
> 
> But they are close to unheard-of outside Russia, and this isn't because they aren't good composers. It's because their musical heritage was for many decades blocked off and repelled by the rest of the musical community. SA lot of it is due to the sudden changes in Russia, which possibly made Nationalist Russian music repulsive to the rest of the world for a time, and since it couldn't be twisted for other patriotic ends (ex. Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture).
> 
> Some of the smallest and inconsequential French and German and English composers have been well championed by musicians of western Europe and the US, even if they made much less music than the Russian composers, and so they are known on this side of the world.


They will get the attention they deserve one day... I just hope that that it will happen during my lifetime.
Luchshe pozdno, chem nikogda.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

Manok said:


> There's nothing more disheartening to me than finding a composer I like who wrote lots, but for whatever reason just int widely recorded, so I thought I'd ask which composers you think belong in this category? They don't have to have written lots, just not many recordings by. Scriabin when I first started listening to him, there was hardly anything recorded by.


Guess what, I just stumbled upon a complete dissertation that is about the popularity and reception of Scriabin's music.

http://independent.academia.edu/Lin...exander_Scriabins_Twentieth-Century_Reception

Could be interesting.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

Manok said:


> There's nothing more disheartening to me than finding a composer I like who wrote lots, but for whatever reason just int widely recorded, so I thought I'd ask which composers you think belong in this category? They don't have to have written lots, just not many recordings by. Scriabin when I first started listening to him, there was hardly anything recorded by.


Believe me, I'm not discounting your feelings, but I'd like to point out something. We are living in a Golden Age for classical music lovers, no matter what composer is your favorite.

When I started collecting back in the late 1960's, my only option if I wanted to get a Scriabin recording was to go to a record store and look under "Classical", "Scriabin".. The whole selection might have been 4 or 5 recordings at most. I could go to the library and maybe listen to a couple more out-of-print and terribly scratched LPs.

Archiv.music today lists 485 recordings of Scriabin's music - 8 Chamber, 91 Orchestral, 396 Piano. As far as alternate versions, there are 45 recordings of the "Poem of Ecstasy", 33 of the "Poem of Fire", 38 of the 9th Piano Sonata. (True that's 78 of the 91 orchestral recordings devoted to just two works, but according to the Scriabin Society of America, the man only published 10 orchestral pieces in total.) In comparison with the 1960's, an embarrassment of riches.

If you mean "Why isn't Scriabin as famous as Tchaikovsky or Rachmaninov?", I'll just repeat my mantra - "Fame is meaningless". If you enjoy Scriabin, you've got a ton of stuff to listen to.


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

Vesteralen said:


> Believe me, I'm not discounting your feelings, but I'd like to point out something. We are living in a Golden Age for classical music lovers, no matter what composer is your favorite.
> 
> When I started collecting back in the late 1960's, my only option if I wanted to get a Scriabin recording was to go to a record store and look under "Classical", "Scriabin".. The whole selection might have been 4 or 5 recordings at most. I could go to the library and maybe listen to a couple more out-of-print and terribly scratched LPs.
> 
> ...


True about there being more recordings than ever, but I was just trying to start a discussion that would hopefully less to composers that don't get talked about all that often here or elsewhere.


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

Manok said:


> True about there being more recordings than ever, but I was just trying to start a discussion that would hopefully less to composers that don't get talked about all that often here or elsewhere.


If you follow my listens in the current listening thread you will find I listen to a whole lot of things by lesser known composers who should be famous. I actually enjoy the exploration of such works. Not out of some sort of elitist attitude but out of curiosity and love for new things. I've always been that way. I still love the well known masters but there is a peculiar joy in discovering some work that get's seldom heard. I hope that others will find the same joy of discovery.

Kevin


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Sorry, but 1 trained musician who's studied and learned music, trumps 1000 listeners with no real experience beyond the passive. You have no evidence whatsoever, just judgments made in ignorance, following the ignorant herd. He named real musicians who actually know what they're talking about.


As a trained musician I disagree at least with trained musicians like myself who have been taught at schools etc. Nothing wrong with that school was fun but I think sometimes self taught musicians or even non-musicians can offer a different perspective. They haven't been taught someone else's view. Sure you learn your on view with time but some of the old "dogma" I guess must stick. I find the idea that someone who devoted a large amount of time an energy listening to music gets trumpeted by some kid and a recorder farcical. *SO* 

Sometimes we musicians can think too highly of ourselves.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> ... I can assure you that comparing Charles Ives to Beethoven, ...


I don't think there's anything wrong with comparing the 'genius' or innovation or creativity, etc. of those two composers, however different they are.

We know the innovations of Beethoven in his own time. But Ives was equally innovative about 100 years later (well, a bit less than that - active from about 1890's to 1900's). Ives foresaw so many things to happen right up till today. His work with things like atonality, microtonality, things reminiscent of minimalism, folkish 'Americana,' neo-classical tendencies (eg. he admired all the three B's), polyrhythms and so on really where at the forefront of his time. Schoenberg admired him and even Bartok was influenced by Cowell who was in turn influenced heavily by Ives. I can go on. Fact is that most if not all 'big name' composers, whether from Europe or USA or Australia indeed, they added to the richness of classical music (and beyond - to refer briefly to Zappa, I know he was a big admirer of Varese, and so was Charlie Parker!).

So there you go. But I will not 'butt in' on other aspects of this thread. There's been enough heat generated here already.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Sorry, but 1 trained musician who's studied and learned music, trumps 1000 listeners with no real experience beyond the passive. You have no evidence whatsoever, just judgments made in ignorance, following the ignorant herd. He named real musicians who actually know what they're talking about.


As a trained musician I agree with this 100%.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Vesteralen-Believe me, I'm not discounting your feelings, but I'd like to point out something. We are living in a Golden Age for classical music lovers, no matter what composer is your favorite.

When I started collecting back in the late 1960's, my only option if I wanted to get a Scriabin recording was to go to a record store and look under "Classical", "Scriabin".. The whole selection might have been 4 or 5 recordings at most. I could go to the library and maybe listen to a couple more out-of-print and terribly scratched LPs.

Archiv.music today lists 485 recordings of Scriabin's music - 8 Chamber, 91 Orchestral, 396 Piano.

Indeed! I started listening to classical music around the time CDs first hit the market... or a bit earlier. I started seriously collecting classical music after getting a "real job" in the mid-90s. Even at that time, if I were to go to the Schubert section of my music store, I'd be lucky to come upon more than one disc of his lieder, and if I went to the section devoted to Handel I'd be confronted with dozens of recordings of the _Water Music, Royal Fireworks Music_, the _Concerti Grossi_ op. 3 & 6 and the _Messiah_... and perhaps one other oratorio... probably _Solomon_. Today, one can choose from dozens of recordings of Winterreise and Schwanengesang as well as sets of the complete lieder, as well as multiple recordings of Handel's Italian cantatas and all of his operas and oratorios. More obscure composers... Alessandro Scarlatti, J.C. Bach, Hugo Wolf, Antonio Caldara, Scriabin, Duparc, etc... are more accessible than they ever were.

If you mean "Why isn't Scriabin as famous as Tchaikovsky or Rachmaninov?", I'll just repeat my mantra - "Fame is meaningless". 

It means, quite simply, that more people, myself included, think that Tchaikovsky is a greater or more important composer. But I wholly agree that fame... or lack thereof is no measure of artistic merit. Personally, I think Scriabin in far from being unknown or grossly underrated.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I don't think there's anything wrong with comparing the 'genius' or innovation or creativity, etc. of those two composers, however different they are.

OK... I agree that we can make constructive comparisons between any two artists we like. We might compare Bach with Philip Glass or Miles Davis if we wish. What I was suggesting was that the sort of comparison raised (An American not knowing Ives is like a German not knowing Beethoven) is useless and absurd. I quite like Ives, but there is no way that he is in the same category with Beethoven... the same degree of centrality to the development of American music... and classical music as a whole.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> I don't think there's anything wrong with comparing the 'genius' or innovation or creativity, etc. of those two composers, however different they are.
> 
> OK... I agree that we can make constructive comparisons between any two artists we like. We might compare Bach with Philip Glass or Miles Davis if we wish. What I was suggesting was that the sort of comparison raised (An American not knowing Ives is like a German not knowing Beethoven) is useless and absurd. I quite like Ives, but there is no way that he is in the same category with Beethoven... the same degree of centrality to the development of American music... and classical music as a whole.


Well I demonstrated that he was / is central to the development of American music, but I think also music coming after him as a whole.

Eg. Ives influence on all those trends I highlighted in my above post. And there's plenty more, its just the tip of the iceberg. He's even influenced European composers - as I made the point with Bartok, through the 'medium' so to speak of Cowell - and also Australian composers.

Here are a few examples what Ives foresaw:

Microtonality - going to Partch
Minimalism - going to 1960's minimalists, eg. Glass, Reich
Atonality - not as strong in USA as Europe, but many composers did at least use it to a degree, eg. Bernstein
Incorporating jazz - Gershwin
Incorporating American folk musics - Copland
Incorporating hymn tunes - a whole lot, eg. Hovhaness is one

& I'm no 'expert' on Ives or anything. This is basically common knowledge, pick up any Ives cd with good liner notes, and you may well read this. Or any book on composers, esp. 20th century or American composers. Or just listen to the music and hear the connections with future composers. Its not rocket science, trust me.

I'd forget Beethoven as he was in another time/place. But I would say Ives is just as significant as his contemporary Mahler. They were both doing quite similar things in their symphonies. Its not known if they knew of eachother's work. Mahler was apparently about to conduct - and had sighted the score of - one of Ives' symphonies (I think the 2nd) before his death. Mahler wanted to perform it with the New York Philharmonic. Who knows what would have happened had he not died? & in light of that, funny how Bernstein later did a great deal to boost Mahler's profile after he had been in the doldrums quite a bit. Lenny did similar with Ives, and Ives in old age actually lived to see part of that happen, in its early stages as Lenny was starting his career/connection with the NYPO (that Mahler had conducted - not hard to make links all over the place here).

I can go on, what I'm saying that I don't care for superficial point scoring type things. On both sides, its a fruitless debate, a waste of time. What is useful though to look at it broadly and see what they all contributed and then kind of nut out the connections. There are so many connections, right up to today, streching right back. Its like a relay race.


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

Lenfer said:


> As a trained musician I disagree at least with trained musicians like myself who have been taught at schools etc. Nothing wrong with that school was fun but I think sometimes self taught musicians or even non-musicians can offer a different perspective. They haven't been taught someone else's view. Sure you learn your on view with time but some of the old "dogma" I guess must stick. I find the idea that someone who devoted a large amount of time an energy listening to music gets trumpeted by some kid and a recorder farcical. *SO*
> 
> Sometimes we musicians can think too highly of ourselves.


As a fellow musician, I can agree with that.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Another great (though obscure) composer: Australia's Percy Aldridge Grainger


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Another great (though obscure) composer: Australia's Percy Aldridge Grainger


He's obscure? I went to his museum only a month ago.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> He's obscure? I went to his museum only a month ago.


He was *Australian* you live in *Australia* so it's likely his museum would be there no? For those of us who don't live in *Australia* and I suspect many *Australians* he might be considered obscure. :tiphat:


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> He's obscure? I went to his museum only a month ago.


Well, relatively speaking. He's not completely unknown, but his name seldom comes up, despite the beauty of his work and his innovations. How was the museum?


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

BurningDesire said:


> Well, relatively speaking. He's not completely unknown, but his name seldom comes up, despite the beauty of his work and his innovations. How was the museum?


Yeah Grainger was an innovator (and a pretty wierd man!). From folksong collecting to developing piano technique (on par with the innovations of Ives and Debussy at that time, guys like that. Late in his life he even went into chance based and electronic music. His 'free music machines' can be seen at that museum in Melbourne I think (i've not been there physically but I've visited their website - great site/resource on the man, check it out).

He is known here for his arrangments like 'Tune from the County Derry' (Danny Boy) which does get trundled out as an encore at concerts now and then. His ballet 'The Warriors' has also been played in recent years. But to the 'common Australian,' I think they don't know him beyond his folk song arrangments, which are great, but there's a lot more to him than that. What I have is two cd's on Aussie eloquence label with pianist Leslie Howard playing a variety of Grainger's things, from the more popular to the more obscure ('In a Nutshell' suite is amazing, check it out!) and even I did not know most of these works until buying the cd I think last year.

But of course he's a junk composer cos he didn't wear a flamin' wig.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Sid James said:


> Yeah Grainger was an innovator (and a pretty wierd man!). From folksong collecting to developing piano technique (on par with the innovations of Ives and Debussy at that time, guys like that. Late in his life he even went into chance based and electronic music. His 'free music machines' can be seen at that museum in Melbourne I think (i've not been there physically but I've visited their website - great site/resource on the man, check it out).
> 
> He is known here for his arrangments like 'Tune from the County Derry' (Danny Boy) which does get trundled out as an encore at concerts now and then. His ballet 'The Warriors' has also been played in recent years. But to the 'common Australian,' I think they don't know him beyond his folk song arrangments, which are great, but there's a lot more to him than that. What I have is two cd's on Aussie eloquence label with pianist Leslie Howard playing a variety of Grainger's things, from the more popular to the more obscure ('In a Nutshell' suite is amazing, check it out!) and even I did not know most of these works until buying the cd I think last year.
> 
> But of course he's a junk composer cos he didn't wear a flamin' wig.


I'm mostly familiar with his work for wind band, like the Irish Tune from County Derry and Lincolnshire Posy. Even though he builds these pieces off of folk-tunes, the harmonies and the orchestrations are just.... amazing, a man who truly knew how to write spectacularly for wind band. Lincolnshire Posy to me is especially cool when you know the story behind it: he traveled around the English countryside and recorded rural people singing folk tunes, and then he transformed those tunes into portraits of the people who sang them to him. Like the movement "Lord Melbourne" which begins with heroic, bombastic, triumphant brass chords, but in free time, each beat given by the conductor to give the feel of a drunk singer. So much personality and imagination employed by Grainger.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

He was also ahead of his time in designing sports bras.


----------



## Guest (Aug 10, 2012)

Concerning Russian composers trapped in their home country, I propose we liberate them, chronologically. Starting with Alexander Alyabiev (1787-1851). Does anyone know of an earlier one?














Be free, Alyabyev, be free!!


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

^Wow, that's delightful!

Kind of hard to believe it was written in 1825.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

mensch said:


> Charles-Valentin Alkan, stylistically he falls between Chopin and Liszt. His piano output is very good and not often recorded.


My local supplier has 43 cd's devoted to Alkan, I think that's pretty good. I remember that when Raymond Lewenthal's famous LP came out in 1966 it caused a huge furore.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Lenfer said:


> He was *Australian* you live in *Australia* so it's likely his museum would be there no? For those of us who don't live in *Australia* and I suspect many *Australians* he might be considered obscure. :tiphat:


I don't think he's particularly obscure but people are certainly, as Sid indicates, not really aware of the whole picture.
He was a virtuoso pianist and travelled the world concertizing, as our American friends would say.
He was a close friend of Grieg and championed his piano concerto at every possible occasion, he played it at 
Grieg's memorial concert.
He also made a piano roll recording of it including the orchestral parts. In 1978 in association with the Australian Broadcasting Commision this recording was painstakingly refurbished and the orchestral parts removed.
The Sydney Symphony under John Hopkins then recorded the orchesral accompaniment and the whole thing was sown together.
The recording was issued by RCA and it is an eye-opener because it is somewhat different from what we normally hear today.
Other piano roll recordings by Grainger include Schumann's Sonata No.3, Etudes Symphoniques and the op.29 Romance.
Also pieces by Chopin,Scott,Debussy and his arrangement of Brahms' Lullaby, Op.49.Delius' "Brigg Fair" arr.for four hands with Ralph Leopold,Sullivan's Irish Dances,Grieg's Norwegian Folk Songs and his own popular tunes.
There is nothing wrong, by the way, with piano roll recordings as long as the machinery is in correct working order.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> Ageism once again.


Please avoid such puerile comments that in this case make no sense.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Sorry, but 1 trained musician who's studied and learned music, trumps 1000 listeners with no real experience beyond the passive. You have no evidence whatsoever, just judgments made in ignorance, following the ignorant herd. He named real musicians who actually know what they're talking about.


I was not aware that composers only composed for so-called trained musicians who often show astonishing lack of knowledge. No I thought they wrote for the "ignorant" herd for their enjoyment ---or am I wrong.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> What about the 20th Century? I forgot about Poulenc and Respighi. Both very unknown. And of course Ligeti is known but not known enough.


Neither Poulenc or Respighi are very unknown and Ligetti is getting to be far too well known---around here anyway!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Well is VerySeniorMember a musician? a composer? a student of music history and theory and performance? If he is, then I'll concede that he probably knows more than I do and is more experienced than me because I am a younger artist, but he can still be ignorant and wrong, and even if he was a studied musician, I doubt he can really hold a candle to Boulez or Xenakis or any of the others listed. But if he isn't, he's just a listener, then I'm sorry, but as a musician and composer and somebody who studies and takes this artform quite seriously, I think I hold a little more authority on the subject than somebody who only listens, and especially when we're talking about the worth of an artist I have listened to a great deal of, as compared to what likely amounts to nothing in his case (he hasn't said how much, he may feel free to prove me wrong and he's listened to hundreds of Zappa works).


No body can possibly agree with one word of any of this. Furthermore you do not appear to be offering an opinion but making a statement that people like me are only listeners and are ignorant---I object and consider this beyond the pale.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

moody said:


> Neither Poulenc or Respighi are very unknown and Ligetti is getting to be far too well known---around here anyway!


Stats say differently. And Ligeti is more famous than Poulenc or Respighi.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Sid James said:


> Yeah Grainger was an innovator (and a pretty wierd man!). From folksong collecting to developing piano technique (on par with the innovations of Ives and Debussy at that time, guys like that. Late in his life he even went into chance based and electronic music. His 'free music machines' can be seen at that museum in Melbourne I think (i've not been there physically but I've visited their website - great site/resource on the man, check it out).
> 
> He is known here for his arrangments like 'Tune from the County Derry' (Danny Boy) which does get trundled out as an encore at concerts now and then. His ballet 'The Warriors' has also been played in recent years. But to the 'common Australian,' I think they don't know him beyond his folk song arrangments, which are great, but there's a lot more to him than that. What I have is two cd's on Aussie eloquence label with pianist Leslie Howard playing a variety of Grainger's things, from the more popular to the more obscure ('In a Nutshell' suite is amazing, check it out!) and even I did not know most of these works until buying the cd I think last year.
> 
> But of course he's a junk composer cos he didn't wear a flamin' wig.


For goodness sake ,enough of the wig stuff already!!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> Stats say differently. And Ligeti is more famous than Poulenc or Respighi.


It is pointless quoting "stats", be good enough to show these if you would be so kind. It's always a way of educating us ignorants.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

WIgs rule. Great era.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Last.fm and Amazon both point with Ligeti getting considerably more reviews and plays. Poulence getting 40% of Ligeti and Respighi about 30%.


----------



## mensch (Mar 5, 2012)

moody said:


> My local supplier has 43 cd's devoted to Alkan, I think that's pretty good. I remember that when Raymond Lewenthal's famous LP came out in 1966 it caused a huge furore.


That's quite a lot, and I must say I was happily surprised by the catalogue of Alkan iTunes has to offer. It's good to see that his music is recorded more often now. 
Unfortunately I have yet to come across his name on the concert programmes here in the Netherlands. At my local concert hall there's a lot of Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann and a dollop of Chopin and Liszt to be found. I will certainly be attending those concerts, but an Alkan recital would be high on my list of must-see events as well.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

moody said:


> Neither Poulenc or Respighi are very unknown and Ligetti is getting to be far too well known---around here anyway!


*Ligeti* is featured numerous times on the "contemporary classical" best seller list on *Amazon*. He's hardly even avant-garde these days...


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Stats say differently. And Ligeti is more famous than Poulenc or Respighi.

It depends on the stats. Google says there are 3.46 Million pages (half of them here, no doubt) linking to Ligeti, 2.65 Million linking to Respighi, and 1.19 Million linking to Poulenc. Of course there are also 9.71 Million linking to Bartok (which sort of clarifies the Bartok vs Ligeti nonsense) and 130 Million+ linking to Mozart.:lol:

Looking at other stats we find that there are 527 recordings available of Ligeti on Amazon, while there are 1,200 of Respeghi and nearly 1,850 of Poulence. Assuming that BurningDesire is right, and the opinion of one trained musician is worth that of 1,000 listeners, it would appear that far less trained musicians admire Ligeti enough to record him than Respighi and Poulenc. Now what about Bartok (3,000+ recordings) or dare I say it? Mozart (33,000+ recordings:lol.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> 130 Million+ linking to Mozart.:lol:
> 
> Mozart (33,000+ recordings:lol.


Hey, alot of people are satisfied with mediocrity :3 even in the classical world~


----------



## Toddlertoddy (Sep 17, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Hey, alot of people are satisfied with mediocrity :3 even in the classical world~


Can you stop it please? We get that you think that Mozart is overrated. Now it's just annoying and immature. I don't care if you're "a musician and composer and somebody who studies and takes this artform quite seriously", just stop being so self-righteous.

Anyway, does John Ireland count? He doesn't seem famous, but has some good stuff.


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

BurningDesire said:


> Hey, alot of people are satisfied with mediocrity :3 even in the classical world~


Same as above


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Lenfer said:


> As a trained musician I disagree at least with trained musicians like myself who have been taught at schools etc. Nothing wrong with that school was fun but I think sometimes self taught musicians or even non-musicians can offer a different perspective. They haven't been taught someone else's view. Sure you learn your on view with time but some of the old "dogma" I guess must stick. I find the idea that someone who devoted a large amount of time an energy listening to music gets trumpeted by some kid and a recorder farcical. *SO*
> 
> Sometimes we musicians can think too highly of ourselves.


I was talking about trained musicians, people studied in music history, theory, the craft and performance and art of music. A kid on a recorder is obviously not going to know more than an experienced listener, but an experienced listener who only listens can't claim to know more than a studied musician.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Hey, alot of people are satisfied with mediocrity :3 even in the classical world~

No need to apologize for your taste for substandard composers... you'll eventually grow out of them.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

"...an experienced listener who only listens can't claim to know more than a studied musician..."

Some day... after you've graduated with your oh so valuable degree that you imagine makes you so much more knowledgeable than everyone else (except, it seems, all those musicians, singers, conductors who realize that Mozart has a lot more to offer than Frank Zappa or Ligeti) and you are employed at best, as likely you will be, teaching _Frère Jacques_ to elementary school children (or have completely given up on this music thing) you may realize just how pretentious you were and just how little you knew (or thought you knew) about a subject far broader and deeper than you can even begin to imagine.

Your assumption ignores the fact that while the trained musician may know more about the mechanic of playing music, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the ability to offer insightful critical judgment on a given composer, a given work, or a specific performance/recording. We only need to look to your tone-deafness when it comes to Mozart to prove this fact.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

How about John Field? His playing and compositions influenced a broad range of well-known composers, including Frédéric Chopin, Johannes Brahms, Robert Schumann, and Franz Liszt. I first came across him years ago when I was enthralled with Chopin's _Nocturnes_ and was seeking out similar works by others. Field was famous for having originated the form... and his _Nocturnes_ are quite nice. I also happened upon Faure's at the time as well.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> "...an experienced listener who only listens can't claim to know more than a studied musician..."
> 
> Some day... after you've graduated with your oh so valuable degree that you imagine makes you so much more knowledgeable than everyone else (except, it seems, all those musicians, singers, conductors who realize that Mozart has a lot more to offer than Frank Zappa or Ligeti) and you are employed at best, as likely you will be, teaching _Frère Jacques_ to elementary school children (or have completely given up on this music thing) you may realize just how pretentious you were and just how little you knew (or thought you knew) about a subject far broader and deeper than you can even begin to imagine.


If you think Mozart is among the very best music has to offer, you obviously don't comprehend how broad and deep this subject really is.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

If you think Mozart is among the very best music has to offer, you obviously don't comprehend how broad and deep this subject really is.

That's fine with me. It would put me in the company of all those other professional musicians and conductors (not mere students who are pretending to know more than they do) whose opinions are worth 1000X whatever you have to offer: Solti, Karajan, Bohm, Klemperer, Rattle, Perlman, Vladimir Horenstein, Milstein, Marriner, Gardiner, Daniel Barenboim, Abaddo, Colin Davis, Jeffery Tate, Christoph Eschenbach, Anne Sophie Mutter, Alfred Brendel, Arthur Grumiaux, Raymond Leppard, Magdalena Kozena, Janet Baker, Cecilia Bartoli, Renee Fleming, Mitsuko Uchida, Maria-João Pires, Géza Anda, Vladimir Ashkenazy, Istvan Kertesz, Maurizio Pollini, Emmanuel Ax, Andras Schiff, Murray Perahia, Arthur Grumiaux, Hilary Hahn, Nigel Kennedy, Julia Fischer, Henryk Szeryng, Zubin Mehta, Teresa Berganza, Kiri Te Kanawa, Lucia Popp, Michael Maniaci, Natalie Dessay, Gundula Janowitz, Simon Keenlyside, Diana Damrau, Edith Mathis, Hermann Prey, Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, etc.......

But of course you imagine that your sophomoric opinion outweighs all of these professional musicians and more. And you wonder why your opinions aren't afforded the least bit of respect? Simply put... your repeated dismissive comments concerning Mozart are an embarrassment... but you don't have the good sense to quit. You keep at it so that your ignorance with regard to Mozart (and by association, the whole of your opinions with regards to music) becomes more and more obvious to everyone.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> I was talking about trained musicians, people studied in music history, theory, the craft and performance and art of music. A kid on a recorder is obviously not going to know more than an experienced listener, but an experienced listener who only listens can't claim to know more than a studied musician.


If you are an example of what you're talking about here--well, I claim that I can.
Mind you I'll admit that you have me beat all ends up when it comes to My Little Pony.


----------



## presto (Jun 17, 2011)

I'm always very impressed with Kozeluch every time I hear anything by him, far more interesting and absorbing than a lot of lesser known classical composers.


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

I think BurningDesire is just trolling. 

Anyway, on the subject of the thread, I'm not knowledgeable on the subject to add anything except a general plea for Renaissance composers, who it seems to me lose out of popularity polls because of their time. For a specific one I would go for Cristobal de Morales who seems lesser known, but who I like from what little I know.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

BurningDesire doesn't troll. BurningDesire speaks the truth. Never disrespect BurningDesire.


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> BurningDesire doesn't troll. BurningDesire speaks the truth. Never disrespect BurningDesire.





mmsbls said:


> It is very easy to speak the truth and also seriously troll. The two are by no means exclusive. But, yes, no one should be disrespected.


This is of course right. That remark she made was, like others, pretty provocative however.

It is amusing and fun to support one composer at every opportunity (like CoAG and Ligeti), but taking every opportunity to insult one is bound to raise tempers


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> BurningDesire doesn't troll. BurningDesire speaks the truth. Never disrespect BurningDesire.


It is very easy to speak the truth and also seriously troll. The two are by no means exclusive. But, yes, no one should be disrespected.

Back on track -

This thread (and the partner) suffer from people not having the same definition of famous. I would say Hummel should be more famous now as he was in his day, but some could feel that he still is famous. I would agree with others here who feel that some Renaissance composers should be better know and more often played.

I would probably also say that Louise Farrenc should be more famous. I love her chamber works (sextet, nonet, piano quintets, clarinet trio) as well as her 3rd symphony.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Also, Louis Andriessen is almost never mentioned on this forum. I've seen other forums where he is highly regarded and talked about a lot, but not here. I like his music and I think he ought to be more famous (at least on TC.)


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Cristóbal de Morales, Fernando Sor, Gaspar Sanz, Tomás Luis de Victoria... and virtually the whole of Iberian (Spanish and Portuguese) are woefully unknown in comparison to their German, Italian, French, British, Russian, Polish, Scandanavian/Nordic, Hungarian, Czech, etc... counterparts.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Cristóbal de Morales, Fernando Sor, Gaspar Sanz, Tomás Luis de Victoria... and virtually the whole of Iberian (Spanish and Portuguese) are woefully unknown in comparison to their German, Italian, French, British, Russian, Polish, Scandanavian/Nordic, Hungarian, Czech, etc... counterparts.


Soler especially.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> I was talking about trained musicians, people studied in music history, theory, the craft and performance and art of music. A kid on a recorder is obviously not going to know more than an experienced listener, but an experienced listener who only listens can't claim to know more than a studied musician.


I know I was being facetious my point still stands though at least I think so.


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Claudio Rinaldo Armani-Presto


Isn't he the cousin of Oberto Presto-Furioso Ma Non Troppo?


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> What about the 20th Century? I forgot about Poulenc and Respighi. Both very unknown. And of course Ligeti is known but not known enough.


Frederick Delius
Erik Satie


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

^Satie is quite famous, and certainly he has enough popular pieces to avoid becoming a Pachelbel.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Such maturity, you sure showed us.


Who is the "us" you refer to.
Also I am quite sure that COAG is capable of answering for himself,he always has managed before.


----------



## Carpenoctem (May 15, 2012)

moody said:


> Who is the "us" you refer to.
> Also I am quite sure that COAG is capable of answering for himself,he always has managed before.


Don't expect a mature and intelligent discussion from them, I haven't been here for long but ever since I joined I have only seen trolling and hating in their posts, with little logic.

Mature listeners are dinosaurs, Mozart sucks, modern music rocks, and those who think otherwise are wrong. Rofl.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Such maturity, you sure showed *us*.


Is it possible for one poster to have two different ISPs? Just wondering....


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

Vesteralen said:


> Is it possible for one poster to have two different ISPs? Just wondering....


Two or more homes  We have one ISP in the city and one in the country as the other won't provide broadband that far out.


----------



## Ivanovich (Aug 12, 2012)

The lesser-known masters of the Franco-Flemish school deserve more attention. Alexander Agricola, relatively unknown and seldom recorded, is one of the more fascinating composers of the Renaissance. From Wikipedia: _His music was very highly regarded in its day, the very distinctive style leading to one contemporary commentator referring to it as "crazy", and another as "sublime"._


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I was listening to this disc just a few days ago:










Agricola was certainly a composer worthy of more attention... but then, how many of the finest composers of the Renaissance or Middle-Ages are afforded a degree of recognition even slightly near what they are due?


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

moody said:


> I don't think he's particularly obscure but people are certainly, as Sid indicates, not really aware of the whole picture.
> He was a virtuoso pianist and travelled the world concertizing, as our American friends would say.
> He was a close friend of Grieg and championed his piano concerto at every possible occasion, he played it at
> Grieg's memorial concert.
> ...


Yes, Grainger's playing had LOTS of rubato, much more than any pianist today. Its funny because I heard a guy on radio talking about that Grieg concerto recording, and Grieg said that he liked how Grainger played that work. But in terms of current piano playing practice, what Grainger did with that concerto would be frowned upon. It's interesting how these things change, even in a relatively short time (well, if we think of 100 years in the history of music as being a short time?).

But the recordings done more recently by Leslie Howard of Grainger's piano music - I have the two cd's on Eloquence label - well I can hear that Howard uses quite a lot of rubato playing things like 'Handel in the STrand' and so on. I'd guess that Howard is trying to play this music in a style that fits Grainger's own way of playing. & I think it works, well in any case, I love it! As you say, its quite different from everything else.



ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Also, Louis Andriessen is almost never mentioned on this forum. I've seen other forums where he is highly regarded and talked about a lot, but not here. I like his music and I think he ought to be more famous (at least on TC.)


Well I've got a percussion compilation and his music is on it but I have not listened to it yet. Its on the dreaded 'unlistened pile.' BUt he was a big name in late 20th century European music, its just that at this stage to me he's just a name (but it will change once I hear that piece!).


----------

