# That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Which composers have well-defined distinctive styles that didn't change very much? I mean, if you heard a mature piece written by one of them, you'd be able to confidently name the composer even if you hadn't heard it before?


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, C. P. E. Bach and several more in the Romantic period up to including Verdi. Wagner is an obvious one too.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

For me, it's more of a case of getting to know a composer's style after having repeatedly heard a good number of his works. Only then can I more reliably identify a previously unheard work.

A few that come to mind:

Bach
Beethoven
Prokofiev
Shostakovich
Schoenberg
Ligeti
Xenakis

...perhaps Bartók, etc.


----------



## LHB (Nov 1, 2015)

The first person that came to mind is Sorabji. Although there are noticeable differences between his early, middle, and late period works, you wouldn't mistake them for any other composer.



brotagonist said:


> A few that come to mind:
> 
> Bach
> Beethoven
> ...


You could make a case for Bach and perhaps Bartok, but a lot of those composers have some of the most diverse oeuvres out there. Beethoven went from a classical style to romantic. Prokofiev and Shostakovich were avant-garde/futurist early, then went a mostly neo-classical style. Schoenberg went from tonal to atonal, and Ligeti is kind of all over the place.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

^ Like people in real life, I think they experimented with the styles of others, but finally came to their own stories. It's more than a story, really, it's identity.

Perhaps I've burst the bounds of the OP's question  I guess I don't know of any composers that began full-blown and never changed


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Shosty definitely had an indentifiable sound in his first symphony. I've heard early Bartok and Ligeti, and they sound nothing like the mature composers they became.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Definitely Sibelius. Prokofiev, Rimsky, Tchaikovsky.


----------



## plans (Oct 20, 2015)

ArtMusic said:


> Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, C. P. E. Bach and several more in the Romantic period up to including Verdi. Wagner is an obvious one too.


agree 100%, would add Paganini


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Brahms had a _remarkably_ consistent sound. He got better, but he always sounded like Brahms, starting with the Scherzo in E flat minor he wrote at 18.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

brotagonist said:


> Perhaps I've burst the bounds of the OP's question  I guess I don't know of any composers that began full-blown and never changed


Yeah, that's true. It's why I waffled in the OP and said a "mature piece." Partial damage control!


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Richard Strauss is always unmistakable.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Any _mature_ work? CPE 'fer sure'. Didn't he always do the stop-start thing? Reminds me of the first time learning to drive a car with 'standard' transmission.


----------



## Abraham Lincoln (Oct 3, 2015)

Tchaikovsky perhaps?


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2015)

I agree with Brahms. Not really any others.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I'll pick the low-hanging fruit and say Philip Glass.


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2015)

Blancrocher said:


> I'll pick the low-hanging fruit and say Philip Glass.


Einstein and the 9th Symphony are pretty different, m8. That said, I'd still be able to identify them with ease as Phil Glass, but I could also identify them as early and late


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

nathanb said:


> Einstein and the 9th Symphony are pretty different, m8. That said, I'd still be able to identify them with ease as Phil Glass, but I could also identify them as early and late


I just put on the 9th (which I'd never heard) and it's got one of his familiar ostinato themes right off the bat, and skipping around I'm hearing lots of stuff from his bag of tricks--pretty sure I'd have guessed right on a test.

*p.s.* Fwiw, I'm enjoying listening to it, though.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Glazunov
Nielsen
Myaskovsky
Tubin
Bax
Rachmaninoff


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2015)

Blancrocher said:


> I just put on the 9th (which I'd never heard) and it's got one of his familiar ostinato themes right off the bat, and skipping around I'm hearing lots of stuff from his bag of tricks--pretty sure I'd have guessed right on a test.
> 
> *p.s.* Fwiw, I'm enjoying listening to it, though.


I guess I recognize it as different stylistically, overall, but I agree that his use of ostinato is dead giveaway.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

There's a huge difference between pre- and post-_Einstein_ Glass, with _Einstein_ itself being transitional.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Takemitsu's style changed noticeably around the mid-1970s, but even then it wasn't a particularly dramatic change. His work is very consistent in its aesthetic from when he was in his 20s on.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Some composers have a really distinctive voice. Huilunsoitaja taught me to use the phrase, 'isms' to refer to a composers signature sound. Some of them really just seem to live in these 'isms'.

Three great modernist names immediately come to mind:

*Martinu* for his syncopated rhythms, wind orchestration, particular way of underlying piano as a timbre in orchestral music.
*Shostakovich* for sure as well, for his signature themes that he just modifies a little bit, and lots of the relentless rhythms. 
*Nielsen*, for his oscillating 2nds, downward da dum dumm with 4ths and other intervals, and that particular use of the minor 3rd in major key that sounds bluesy.

And yet, they changed much over the course of their careers and composed music to appeal to a wide range of listeners.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Which composers have well-defined distinctive styles that didn't change very much? I mean, if you heard a mature piece written by one of them, you'd be able to confidently name the composer even if you hadn't heard it before?


What about Dominico Scarlatti? Is there a development in the sonatas? Kirkpatrick says there is but as a listener rather than a performer I haven't noticed. And Trabaci -- is there a real difference between Bk 1 and Bk 2? And then there's Claudio Merulo. And everything by Arauxo sounds the same to me. And I know nothing about Vivaldi but I thought he was famous for writing the same music over and over again.

Other example: Buxtehude maybe, I'm not sure. And maybe Louis Couperin and Jehan Titelouze.

One thing that came up recently was to do with Thomas Tomkins, where soemone said that he developed a more abstract austere style at the end of his life. Again, I hadn't noticed.

Someone mentioned Xenakis above, but the final pieces are very different -- maybe it's just a deterioration. And Bartok at the end, though again this may be just a deterioration.

J S Bach is interesting, and I'm not sure.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

All the great composers and even many lesser composers have a distinctive personal stamp to their music . Sibelius and Nielsen , whose 150 year this is, are both Scandinavian composers with unmistakable voices .


----------

