# Worst composer



## sangpoincorporated (29 d ago)

The worst composer is Tony Villodas. His " "Threnody for Frank Zappa " or
Google say
jt productions "she dances in the wind" or 
" Zappa Beefheart "
Both "compositions are musical nightmares. Those tin eared " composer makes my brain hurt. That goes for Zappa and Beefheart as well. And that Ives !!!! yuck! 
Don't get me started.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

LOL.

There's a faction at this site that is _sure_ that *John Williams* is the worst composer.

But the rest of us know it's a toss-up between *Brian Eno, Frantisek Kotzwara,* and *John Cage*.


----------



## REP (Dec 8, 2011)

The worst composer is the one you've never heard of because their music was too bad to survive in any form. If you've heard of them, then they're automatically out of the running.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

There is always the ‘Today’s Composers’ forum here …


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Pauly Shore


----------



## Hogwash (5 mo ago)

OpenAI ChatGPT answer for who is the worst composer:

It is not productive or fair to label any composer as the "worst," as artistic merit is subjective and open to interpretation. Different people have different preferences and opinions when it comes to classical music, and what one person may consider the worst could be another person's favorite.

It is important to remember that all composers, regardless of their perceived talent or popularity, have made significant contributions to the art form and have had a lasting impact on classical music. It is not productive or fair to label any composer as the "worst," and it is more constructive to focus on the positive aspects of their work and the ways in which they have influenced and inspired others.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

sangpoincorporated said:


> The worst composer is Tony Villodas. His " "Threnody for Frank Zappa " or
> Google say
> jt productions "she dances in the wind" or
> " Zappa Beefheart "
> ...



You did start, never mind will explore it for myself, welcome by the way .


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

REP said:


> The worst composer is the one you've never heard of because their music was too bad to survive in any form. If you've heard of them, then they're automatically out of the running.


Cobra (of 1'54" Beethoven 9) infamy, fancies himself to be a composer and posted computer simulated sound videos of it to Youtube. I haven't listened to them, but they have to be as bad as his Beethoven 9 recording.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Impossible to know. But my choice would be someone that doesn’t prioritize melodies.


----------



## jauharik92 (30 d ago)

Himesh Reshamiya one of the worst composers.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

This thread is pointless in my opinion. As someone who composes, I would hate to be called a "worst composer." What is accomplished here is nothing except an exercise in _Schadenfreude. _If the title were changed to "Würst Composers Liked" at least we could find out something positive, like whether Beethoven preferred Bratwürst or Leberwürst.


----------



## Bernamej (Feb 24, 2014)

Boulez


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

This could easily turn into a 'voice your petty prejudices thread' which has little benefit to anyone - and define 'worst' in terms other than 'I don't like it'.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Bwv 1080 said:


> There is always the ‘Today’s Composers’ forum here …


ouch


----------



## 4chamberedklavier (12 mo ago)

Malx said:


> This could easily turn into a 'voice your petty prejudices thread' which has little benefit to anyone - and define 'worst' in terms other than 'I don't like it'.


I think it's just as interesting/worthwhile as hearing about people talking about whom they consider the 'best' composers. It's not any much different except it's on the other extreme. Of course this is assuming that people in the thread act civil & not resort to insulting composers for no reason + taking the opinions of others as personal attacks.


----------



## RobertJTh (Sep 19, 2021)

Rather pointless and impossible to define.
According to movie buffs, Ed Wood is the worst movie director of all time. But ironically that's just because he was ambitious (and lucky) enough to get some of his abysmal works in the spotlights - and he managed to get some well-known (yet washed up) actors before his camera. So he did have some (questionable) qualities that automatically disqualify him for the title of "worst ever". There must be lots of even worse grade Z cinema artists out there whose works have never seen the daylight.
It's the same with music. If it's recognized by someone, performed and/or recorded, it doesn't qualify for "the worst ever" anymore.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

4chamberedklavier said:


> I think it's just as interesting/worthwhile as hearing about people talking about whom they consider the 'best' composers. It's not any much different except it's on the other extreme. Of course this is assuming that people in the thread act civil & not resort to insulting composers for no reason + taking the opinions of others as personal attacks.


You make a fair point, however I find the need to look for a 'best' equally pointless, comparing Bach with Boulez inevitably only highlights personal preference.
I hope your final sentence proves to be the case.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

pianozach said:


> There's a faction at this site that is _sure_ that *John Williams* is the worst composer.


Well, I'm _sure_ they're just jealous they can't make as much money as he does.


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

REP said:


> The worst composer is the one you've never heard of because their music was too bad to survive in any form. If you've heard of them, then they're automatically out of the running.


I actually had a music history professor tell me once that if there is a composer you never heard of, there's probably a good reason why


----------



## LKB (Jul 27, 2021)

There are undoubtedly a ton of composers I've never heard of over the last several centuries of Western music. But I'm worse than them all, and by God y'all better believe that or I'll post some music here. 

That'll teach you...


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

I'm not sure about "worst" but Stockhausen has never done much for me and I love a lot of the post-war avant-garde composers.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

This thread will, I predict, turn into a "subjective vs objective" thread before too long.

For just about everyone's worst composer, there will be someone else how likes that composer.

Being a person who mostly listens to post WWII classical music, I would bet several of my favorite composers would make other's "worst" list.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

Didn't everyone agree that Schubert is the worst composer in living memory? I'm sure I read that here. I think it was one of those games. So it's official now.



Some important fellow on a forum said:


> Schubert was voted worst composer by both his contemporaries and the official owners of 'classical music plc'. Fans were shocked to see Mozart as runner-up. Brian Ferneyhough said it was a shock outcome, but was happy with his trophy for best, most tuneful and most appreciated composer in the entire world.


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

I'm not sure if this is a useful metric – and something to consider is that I don't know anyone who was an amazing composer before writing for a decent period of time, and having some sort of training (whether that's through doing it and being self-taught, or working with a teacher in some capacity).


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Roger Knox said:


> This thread is pointless in my opinion. As someone who composes, I would hate to be called a "worst composer." What is accomplished here is nothing except an exercise in _Schadenfreude. _If the title were changed to "Würst Composers Liked" at least we could find out something positive, like whether Beethoven preferred Bratwürst or Leberwürst.


Are other posters interested in the Elephant in the room?

How well do different types of listeners hear music that's new and different to them?

It seems like a big issue to me. It's quite noticeable when teaching students in their early teens and then students in their later teens. Also among my adult beginners. 'Often a very wide gap, which makes it interesting to think about. 

I remember how little I could hear in my early years, compared to years later. It's been an eye-opener (so I'm much more understanding and accommodating).
I might have been an atypical case. What's been your experience with inexperienced students?


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> How well do different types of listeners hear music that's new and different to them?


This is quite an interesting thing to consider. And yes, there's a huge variance in terms of how people hear and what they can hear. Ear training and theory can be useful for refining these, and a lot of this variance has to do with early exposure and training, at least based on what I've seen from speaking to other people about this. I do think some of it may also be linked to innate factors such as genetics, but it seems to be a mixture of nature and nurture.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

sangpoincorporated said:


> The worst composer is Tony Villodas. His " "Threnody for Frank Zappa " or
> Google say
> jt productions "she dances in the wind" or
> " Zappa Beefheart "
> ...


Maybe it's the OP who has tin ears? Nevertheless, these threads are a drag. Composer bashing threads should not be tolerated at a forum that exists to promote classical music.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

composingmusic said:


> This is quite an interesting thing to consider. And yes, there's a huge variance in terms of how people hear and what they can hear. Ear training and theory can be useful for refining these, and a lot of this variance has to do with early exposure and training, at least based on what I've seen from speaking to other people about this. I do think some of it may also be linked to innate factors such as genetics, but it seems to be a mixture of nature and nurture.


A matter of time and experience, since tastes alter over time. And above all a willingness to be accommodating outside of personal tastes, which is often difficult. When I was a teenager I did not like 'new music' at all. However (and I may be repeating myself!) I had the benefit of people who could explain things and open my eyes. I remember that we had a particular 'composer in residence' with whom we worked in small groups. I found the initial performance of his working piece quite horrible, but then as it was broken down and analysed I began to have much more appreciation. And this fellow also made comments and suggestions on our own working pieces, turning them from fairly superficial 'exercises' into something more substantial. We lacked not only refined technique, but the ability to move beyond the mere 'sound-a-like' expectations of what 'writing music' for ensembles was about.

In other threads this sort of thing has been painted out as some sort of cultural decline and the spreading of 'modernist ideology' in education. I shudder in a way thinking back at how I presented this fellow with a pretty waltz for string quartet on our first meeting, but how kindly he made suggestions for finding new ways of expressing the same germ of an idea.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Nate Miller said:


> I actually had a music history professor tell me once that if there is a composer you never heard of, there's probably a good reason why


There are gems by obscure or relatively obscure composers. For example, I love Norbert Burgmuller's Piano Concerto.


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

ORigel said:


> There are gems by obscure or relatively obscure composers. For example, I love Norbert Burgmuller's Piano Concerto.


just repeating what I heard in music school all those decades ago

but if you haven't heard of somebody before, one reason for that just might be because the suck, that's all I'm saying.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

Nate Miller said:


> just repeating what I heard in music school all those decades ago
> 
> but if you haven't heard of somebody before, one reason for that just might be because the suck, that's all I'm saying.


There will be something in that. Though hardly anyone had heard of Vivaldi until he was 'rediscovered' (to the chagrin of Stravinsky). He's not a single case either. It's more that the majority only seem to rotate a handful of the same old composers. In that scenario most others are 'unknown'


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

of course there are things to be discovered, but not everything that is obscure is great music, either

just like not all unknown composers suck


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

Think one can only find truly bad composers beginning with the Romantic period with its pretentions toward genius and greatness. Your typical forgotten baroque or classical composer was a competent craftsman who could write perfectly good music, just not at the level of the masters who still get played today.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

but the lowest rung of hell consists of contemporary composers trying to write in a 19th century style but lacking the fundamentals of harmony/counterpoint necessary to pass a undergrad theory exercise (hence the Today's Composers reference)


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Worst composer ever ? Easy . Hermann von Scheisskopf of Germany .


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

superhorn said:


> Worst composer ever ? Easy . Hermann von Scheisskopf of Germany .












"Oh, I won't have that!

There's this fella in East Hampshire...."


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

superhorn said:


> Worst composer ever ? Easy . Hermann von Scheisskopf of Germany .


My favourite composer. I'm disgusted.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

For the benefit of the thread, I encourage every composer on the forum to join the competition for *The Worst Composer of The Moment*_*!*_ Please post the most controversial or criticised piece of your making. Let´s have some fun!

Creative work should be about embracing one´s low or questionable points as well. After all it takes courage to compose stuff for other people to listen to. When composers enjoy complete freedom and search for their limits, there are times when they go near the escape velocity -- and at times they find themselves orbiting the Earth. 

Here is my most questionable piece 'Phase Shift' from 12 years ago. I am not sure what the musical style or genre is but I do know this is crazy music. Probably I just had to get it out of my system at the time. None of my pieces have been criticised as much as this and I am not surprised because nothing in 'Phase Shift' was made to please others. I remember just doing whatever I wanted without even putting much effort into the finesse of the composition. It was all about expressing what I wanted to express.

One curiosity: in the end of the last STRIVE section there is even an Agogo bell playing the Agogo rhythm from Samba as a reference to being forced to play Samba percussion at class at a time I was very stressed. Playing the agogo was an absurd moment of truth which I will always remember: _"This is not who I am". _Not that I have anything against Samba, it is just not who I am.

Some time ago the female vocalist and I remembered this piece and listened to it together, and laughed in disbelief that we have ever created something like it. I still remember just how hard it was to sing the 'STRIVE STRIVE STRIVE'. There was no time for breathing, really, as you had to bark the repeated words.

(The video was quickly put together today mostly of material from my morning walk and is nothing special...)

Hope you 'enjoy'!


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Hogwash said:


> OpenAI ChatGPT answer for who is the worst composer:


I thought the 'I' in AI stood for 'Intelligence'.

I must have been mistaken.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

It may be easier to pick the worst of the recommended Composers on TC. In that case, Xenakis would be my choice.


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Waehnen said:


> For the benefit of the thread, I encourage every composer on the forum to join the competition for *The Worst Composer of The Moment*_*!*_ Please post the most controversial or criticised piece of your making. Let´s have some fun!
> 
> Creative work should be about embracing one´s low or questionable points as well. After all it takes courage to compose stuff for other people to listen to. When composers enjoy complete freedom and search for their limits, there are times when they go near the escape velocity -- and at times they find themselves orbiting the Earth.
> 
> ...


Sounds like a fun idea! I may be able to find something super early that I wrote that could fit this.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

neoshredder said:


> It may be easier to pick the worst of the recommended Composers on TC. In that case, Xenakis would be my choice.


Worst of the Top 20 composers: Bartók

Worst of the Top 40 composers: Berg

Worst of the Top 60 composers: Takemitsu

It's right here 😛

Or no, wait. A different list is right here.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

neoshredder said:


> It may be easier to pick the worst of the recommended Composers on TC. In that case, Xenakis would be my choice.


Sounds interesting to me. But instead of "worst", I would prefer to say that these are the composers whose music connect less with me for now, regardless of their artistic merits.

So, using this list as my reference, the composers I would select for now would be:


Top 10: Schumann;
Top 20: Stravinsky;
Top 30: Schoenberg;
Top 40: Britten;
Top 50: Schnittke;
Top 100: Wolf.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Xisten267 said:


> Sounds interesting to me. But instead of "worst", I would prefer to say that these are the composers whose music connect less with me for now, regardless of their artistic merits.
> 
> So, using this list as my reference, the composers I would select for now would be:
> 
> ...


Yeah I love the Romantic Era. But Schumann is probably my least liked of that era. At least those that prioritized Instrumental music.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

neoshredder said:


> Yeah I love the Romantic Era. But Schumann is probably my least liked of that era. At least those that prioritized Instrumental music.


Schumann is the composer whose music I like the least in that top 10, but I still greatly admire him and love some of his works. He would probably be in my top 25 favorite composers if I did a list right now. Of the famous Romantic era composers, the one that would be my least liked at the moment probably is Hugo Wolf, because he composed mainly lieder, and I dislike the combination of solo piano plus voice (particularly male voice), so non-orchestrated lieder are naturally not my cup of tea, save from some very rare exceptions.

Have you tried Schumann with Karajan already? The first and fourth movements of his _Rhenish_ symphony are marvels in my opinion:


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

composingmusic said:


> Sounds like a fun idea! I may be able to find something super early that I wrote that could fit this.


I would welcome that!


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Waehnen said:


> I would welcome that!


This could be a fun project to see if people want to share some of their super early things!


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

composingmusic said:


> This could be a fun project to see if people want to share some of their super early things!


Or pieces that have been near the escape velocity or ended up orbiting the earth, or been the most disliked by the composer -- like mine!


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Well, I’m currently at my parents’ place and they’ve kept pretty much everything from back in the days! Here’s quite literally one of the first things I’ve written 😄


----------



## Bernamej (Feb 24, 2014)

LKB said:


> There are undoubtedly a ton of composers I've never heard of over the last several centuries of Western music. But I'm worse than them all, and by God y'all better believe that or I'll post some music here.
> 
> That'll teach you...


No, Boulez is worse.


----------



## RobertJTh (Sep 19, 2021)

composingmusic said:


> Well, I’m currently at my parents’ place and they’ve kept pretty much everything from back in the days! Here’s quite literally one of the first things I’ve written 😄


Gotta be triple forte or I'm not gonna bother at all!


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

REP said:


> The worst composer is the one you've never heard of because their music was too bad to survive in any form. If you've heard of them, then they're automatically out of the running.


From times to times they are lurking around in forums on classical music presenting their experiments.

Sometimes they are even blaming well-known and well-regarded composers for their "errors". This only shows their little understanding of CM.

In the end, it is just another example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Forster said:


> I thought the 'I' in AI stood for 'Intelligence'.
> 
> I must have been mistaken.


Honestly the bot's answer seems to me more intelligent than 90% of posts in this thread.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

composingmusic said:


> View attachment 180395
> 
> Well, I’m currently at my parents’ place and they’ve kept pretty much everything from back in the days! Here’s quite literally one of the first things I’ve written 😄


Those parallel 5ths are totally unacceptable.....


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> From times to times they are lurking around in forums on classical music presenting their experiments.
> 
> Sometimes they are even blaming well-known and well-regarded composers for their "errors". This only shows their little understanding of CM.
> 
> In the end, it is just another example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.


I suppose I have really hurt your feelings by criticising the 6th Symphony finale by Mahler. But to compensate, I am happy to take the crown of the Worst Composer if it makes someone like you feel better and less bitter. You know, I am confident enough to laugh at myself and even post the Phase Shift here.


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

RobertJTh said:


> Gotta be triple forte or I'm not gonna bother at all!


Triple forte indeed!


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

mikeh375 said:


> Those parallel 5ths are totally unacceptable.....


There’s quite a lot going on there that I would do differently now haha… we all had to start somewhere! I suppose that’s the point of me posting this – pretty much every composer I know has gone through some sort of learning period, and that’s partially why I find the label of “worst composer” a difficult one.


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Philidor said:


> From times to times they are lurking around in forums on classical music presenting their experiments.
> 
> Sometimes they are even blaming well-known and well-regarded composers for their "errors". This only shows their little understanding of CM.
> 
> In the end, it is just another example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.


On the other hand, I think there is a danger of putting the composers of the past on a pedestal. Yes, these people are considered masters for a reason, but that does not mean that they are perfect. After all, they are human and are prone to errors too.
I think it’s healthier to acknowledge both the strengths and flaws, and then we can also learn and grow from that.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

composingmusic said:


> Yes, these people are considered masters for a reason, but that does not mean that they are perfect.


Nobody said that any composer was perfect, neither as a man nor as a musician.

I have to add that using the word "perfect" together with composing might already give a little hint for a major misunderstanding of art.


composingmusic said:


> I think it’s healthier to acknowledge both the strengths and flaws, and then we can also learn and grow from that.


I think it is difficult to jugde on strengths and flaws with more than one or two decades of distance. - Hundred years ago, women were not allowed to vote and homosexuality was a crime in countries where our forum members are living. If we want to judge the past by our 2022 measures, there is a plentitude of possibilities to feel better than others.

Maybe future generations will judge us on our behaviour in terms of energy.


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Philidor said:


> Nobody said that any composer was perfect, neither as a man nor as a musician.
> 
> I have to add that using the word "perfect" together with composing might already give a little hint for a major misunderstanding of art.


I never said you said this. However, you did say that blaming composers of the past for their “errors” indicates a limited understanding of classical music. Then you said this is an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is what I was replying to – I don’t think it’s healthy to put the composers of the past on a pedestal where they can’t be criticized



Philidor said:


> I think it is difficult to jugde on strengths and flaws with more than one or two decades of distance. - Hundred years ago, women were not allowed to vote and homosexuality was a crime in countries where our forum members are living. If we want to judge the past by our 2022 measures, there is a plentitude of possibilities to feel better than others.


I was thinking more in musical terms rather than social terms, but either way, I think it’s fair to say that we can criticize a lot of people from the past. Sure, the historical context is different and that should be taken into account, but I do think a nuanced critique is possible.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

composingmusic said:


> However, you did say that blaming composers of the past for their “errors” indicates a limited understanding of classical music. Then you said this is an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.


It depends.

If the critizism shows that the critizism is more or less on eye's level with the composer and the composition in question, then I would say that it is not appropriate to call this an example for the Dunning-Kruger effect.

If the critizism shows that its initiator is far away from being on eye's level with the composer and the composition in question, then the critizism fulfills all criteria for the Dunning-Kruger effect.


composingmusic said:


> I think it’s fair to say that we can criticize a lot of people from the past.


This is fair. It is again a question of level. You can call Einstein an idiot, but you should have good arguments and show that you are more intelligent than Einstein, otherwise your critizism might come back as a boomerang. Full in the face.


----------



## PeterKC (Dec 30, 2016)

I like all composers. Even the ones I don't care to listen to.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

I already posted no one knows the "worst" composer since s/he's so bad no one would have heard his or her music. However ... I can attest to the "lowest ranking" composers.

I did a survey from 4 musicological guides once and listed the "top 99" composers. There was a four way tie at No. 99 between Schutz, Cherubini, Herbert and Schnittke. I like two of them and have recordings of theirs in my collection so I surely wouldn't call them "worst."


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> It depends.
> 
> If the critizism shows that the critizism is more or less on eye's level with the composer and the composition in question, then I would say that it is not appropriate to call this an example for the Dunning-Kruger effect.
> 
> ...


So you are saying that only the people who are as good composers themselves as Bach are allowed to criticise the music of Bach. This is of course a ridiculous idea and I am sure you are in the 0,1% minority of the forum members with this opinion of yours. 

If this grand idea of yours was adapted to the society, that would mean that the most intelligent politicians should be able to be dictators and the others should not even have the right to criticise the heads of the state.

One has to stand against this kind of thinking, strongly.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

Waehnen said:


> So you are saying that only the people who are as good composers themselves as Bach are allowed to criticise the music of Bach. This is of course a ridiculous idea and I am sure you are in the 0,1% minority of the forum members with this opinion of yours.


I assume that you have understood what I wanted to say (every other assumption would be offensive). So you are in position to find appropriate answers.

The means to overstate the other side's arguments until they are ridiculous dates back to the Romans (at least). So this is not fully new, but falls back to its initiator the same way as other statements do.

The use of this means shows that it is not intended to get a progress in understanding and maybe even something such as an agreement, but the only goal is to win, in whatever sense, to fully defeat the other side, regardless how weak the own position might be.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> I assume that you have understood what I wanted to say (every other assumption would be offensive). So you are in position to find appropriate answers.
> 
> The means to overstate the other side's arguments until they are ridiculous dates back to the Romans (at least). So this is not fully new, but falls back to its initiator the same way as other statements do.


I am not overstating. My example completely and truthfully reflects your thinking -- it just shows you another side of it which you do not like. That´s all.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

So we are completely fine. Enjoy.


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Waehnen said:


> So you are saying that only the people who are as good composers themselves as Bach are allowed to criticise the music of Bach. This is of course a ridiculous idea and I am sure you are in the 0,1% minority of the forum members with this opinion of yours.
> 
> If this grand idea of yours was adapted to the society, that would mean that the most intelligent politicians should be able to be dictators and the others should not even have the right to criticise the heads of the state.
> 
> One has to stand against this kind of thinking, strongly.


Yes, agreed. It's dangerous to gatekeep who is and isn't allowed to criticize. 

I think there is something to be said in the type of criticism offered; generally bashing composers without cause is something I don't find particularly productive, but nuanced and constructive criticism can both be useful in general and generate very interesting discussion.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

composingmusic said:


> It's dangerous to gatekeep who is and isn't allowed to criticize.


Agreed. It is not about gatekeeping the permission to criticize. But it is about having an idea which criticism can be taken for serious and which can not.


composingmusic said:


> but nuanced and constructive criticism can both be useful in general and generate very interesting discussion.


Agreed again. Everyone showing that his criticism is on eye's level with the object of his criticism can be the initiator of an interesting discussion.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> Agreed. It is not about gatekeeping the permission to criticize. But it is about having an idea which criticism can be taken for serious and which can not.
> 
> Agreed again. Everyone showing that his criticism is on eye's level with the object of his criticism can be the initiator of an interesting discussion.


It would seem to me you are just trying to intimidate the forum members whose opinions you do not like. At the same time you are trying to create a place where you are in an untouchable position with the great master composers, defending them against the mediocrity of the world by downplaying everyone else. The untouchable safe haven where there are no flaws and where one doesn´t have to defend one´s views must be a very tranquil and happy place.

But the others on this forum cannot base their activity on trying to please you and keep up your illusion of the tranquil, happy and untouchable realm where you reign with your friends, the great superhuman untouchable composer masters, looking down at the mediocrity who should just shut their mouths already.

It is unbelievably arrogant to say that a person who knows something about classical music shouldn´t be allowed to spot problems in the works of Gustav Mahler without proving his/her worth to Philidor through intensive games of formal music analysis first. (Or proving that she/he is as good a composer as Mahler themselves.) Absolutely ridiculous.

You will have to come down from this realm of yours, sooner or later. In the field of art there is no untouchable positions.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

To my mind, the decision, which opinions we take seriousy and which not is a decision that all of us are taking every day. What's wrong with that? Or even arrogant?

I think you have to accept that there are people in the world that don't take all your opinions seriously.

If you are entitled to criticise Mahler (of course you are), then others are entitled to criticise you. Fair enough. Like it or not.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> To my mind, the decision, which opinions we take seriousy and which not is a decision that all of us are taking every day. What's wrong with that? Or even arrogant?
> 
> I think you have to accept that there are people in the world that don't take all your opinions seriously.
> 
> If you are entitled to criticise Mahler (of course you are), then others are entitled to criticise you. Fair enough. Like it or not.


You have all the possibilities and means not to take my opinions seriously without continuously saying that I am totally incompetent and without any knowledge about classical music. The wording you have used is aimed at intimidating and undermining me, it is obvious.

Whereas I do no aim at intimidating anyone and have always expressed my appreciation towards Mahler.

You do not have even the very basic minimum appreciation towards me, quite the opposite. You are infuriated and seek for revenge at every opportunity.

So this is not a balanced situation — far from it. One of us is acting in a very juvenile manner.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

composingmusic said:


> Yes, agreed. It's dangerous to gatekeep who is and isn't allowed to criticize.
> 
> I think there is something to be said in the type of criticism offered; generally bashing composers without cause is something I don't find particularly productive, *but nuanced and constructive criticism can both be useful in general and generate very interesting discussion.*


..yep and the nuanced aspect of good criticism draws upon experience and knowledge imo. This kind of subtle critique has a wider and more in depth breadth of information, facts and even technical know-how with which to tease out finer connections, comparisons and observations - even see a bigger picture.

As you suggest CM, constructive criticism is always best but if it's directed at oneself, then imo, the provenance and standing of the critic matters as much as the content and may even be more important.

Composers can even have thoughts of trying to appease respected critics whilst working.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

Waehnen said:


> You do not have even the very basic minimum appreciation towards me, quite the opposite.


In order to be taken seriously, according to my experience, it is important not to talk in public about things about which we obviously do not know too much.

To talk with someone is already an act of appreciation. I think I could have been saying more than once that I decline your invitation to follow on your level of discussion, but I didn't. I think this is ok.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> In order to be taken seriously, according to my experience, it is important not to talk in public about things about which we obviously do not know too much.
> 
> To talk with someone is already an act of appreciation. I think I could have been saying more than once that I decline your invitation to follow on your level of discussion, but I didn't. I think this is ok.


Please tell me in detail what it is you know more about Mahler and classical music than me. Also tell me in detail how I am showing my complete incompetence.

If you cannot do that, it is just bully talk.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

.

I wish you all the best and merry Christmas.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> I wish you all the best and merry Christmas.


So it was all just bully talk. Happy to clear that out for the rest of the forum.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Anyone claiming someone's at a higher level is not qualified at a high enough level to make such a criticism 

Next time one ponders criticizing the greatest, Einaudi... first deeply consider the repercussions before talking. Perhaps his followers will show mercy to you.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

Ethereality said:


> Anyone claiming someone's at a higher level is not qualified at a high enough level to make such a criticism


Thank you very much for pointing this out. Brilliant.

That's exactly the point: The ignorance of the difference between of the level of a discussion (which can be observed and reassured by further questions) and the level of a person (of which we only see the epiphenomena in this context and thus is clearly out of discussion).

Problems may arise if people feel personally humilated if their arguments turn out to be insufficient. Then the ignorance described above starts unfolding its dark power.

Thank you again. Let's stay on the light side of the Force.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> Thank you very much for pointing this out. Brilliant.
> 
> That's exactly the point: The ignorance of the difference between of the level of a discussion (which can be observed and reassured by further questions) and the level of a person (of which we only see the epiphenomena in this context and thus is clearly out of discussion).
> 
> ...


Who is to decide objectively whose arguments are sufficient and whose are not?

Problems arise when people start putting each others on different levels and claim that some people have nothing to say — without any facts to support the claimed incompetence of the person.

I could always say that what Einstein wrote was insufficient and that Einstein was incompetent, but without further arguments that would have nothing to do with the reality and would be more telling of me than the reality.

So I am asking you to again prove my incompetence, prove it even on one point. I have written alot on this forum so it shouldn’t be a hard job especially as you are so convinced on the matter.

Previously you have refused to tell me how I should prove my competence to you. Now you are refusing to in any way prove your claim that I am incompetent.

So it is just bully talk, nothing more.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Bwv 1080 said:


> Your typical forgotten baroque or classical composer was a competent craftsman who could write perfectly good music, just not at the level of the masters who still get played today.


Your typical baroque/classical god-


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

Dear Waehnen,

I deeply feel that this discussion is going a way that is not good for you.

I understand that you feel deeply humilated and injured, and your hurted heart is crying its pain to the forum.

But why? Why do you others give the power to hurt you this way? In a forum, where we encounter on a virtual level only?

I guess that your feeling of being hurt has reasons that are beyond this forum and the discussions therein.

Should I have been the event wakening these energies in you I apologize for this.


Waehnen said:


> Who is to decide objectively whose arguments are sufficient and whose are not?


Nobody. That's the point. (Except in exact sciences, e g. mathematics, when discussing questions within a given system of axioms that are strong enough to discern true and wrong. - Not to mention Goedel.)


Waehnen said:


> Problems arise when people start putting each others on different levels


Nobody put people on levels. Why don't you get the point?

Saying that some argument is not sufficient is not the same as saying that some person is not sufficient.


Waehnen said:


> I could always say that what Einstein wrote was insufficient and that Einstein was incompetent, but without further arguments that would have nothing to do with the reality and would be more telling of me than the reality.


So you are believing in the concept of reality? That's interesting. Are you maybe linking the term of "objectivity" to your concept of "reality"?

As far as I am concerned, I believe that there is a plentitude of truths in parallel.


Waehnen said:


> So I am asking you to again prove my incompetence,


Why? I never claimed that you are incompetent. (With this degree of generality.)


Waehnen said:


> So it is just bully talk, nothing more.


It's up to you ...

I feel that this discussion is running in a vicious circle. So I leave the last statement to you.

All the best.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Philidor said:


> Dear Waehnen,
> 
> I deeply feel that this discussion is going a way that is not good for you.
> 
> ...


I am not humiliated at all, but I am a person who reacts to unnecessary bullying and holds people responsible for their words. I am not intimidated by you at all.

All the best and please learn to behave in year 2023!


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

mikeh375 said:


> ..yep and the nuanced aspect of good criticism draws upon experience and knowledge imo. This kind of subtle critique has a wider and more in depth breadth of information, facts and even technical know-how with which to tease out finer connections, comparisons and observations - even see a bigger picture.
> 
> As you suggest CM, constructive criticism is always best but if it's directed at oneself, then imo, the provenance and standing of the critic matters as much as the content and may even be more important.
> 
> Composers can even have thoughts of trying to appease respected critics whilst working.


Yes, agreed with this. A nuanced and good critique can offer all kinds of insights and be very useful. This kind of critique is how we learn from others, and it’s what one looks for in a good teacher.

Imo, the best teachers can pick apart problems and issues in a way that is constructive and helps the student find their own solutions. I think I may have mentioned before that I’m currently working on a composition degree at a UK institution, and this approach to criticism was very important to me when thinking of who I might want to study with. 

As for self-directed criticism, I think a similar thing applies – if I feel something isn’t working, I try and figure out what exactly isn’t working and why, and that can typically help me figure out how to fix the issue. With external criticism, there’s also external motives and other things that need to be taken into account as well. For instance, if my teacher or a close colleague says something, their motive will be very different than a music critic writing a review!


----------



## composingmusic (Dec 16, 2021)

Waehnen said:


> I am not humiliated at all, but I am a person who reacts to unnecessary bullying and holds people responsible for their words. I am not intimidated by you at all.
> 
> All the best and please learn to behave in year 2023!


Indeed, I think it’s fair to say we all are allowed to like and dislike things even if there isn’t always a rational reason for it. Gatekeeping what people can or can’t like is something I have a problem with. 

I think nuanced critique is better than bashing things that one doesn’t like, but you weren’t bashing anything – I think you just said you don’t particularly enjoy something, which is fine! It’s important to be able to have opinions.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

All this can be solved by tacking onto the end of every post the internet's famous: 'imo/imho'. That's what this thread means really.


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Many listeners believe Frederick Delius to be one of the worst classical composers ever. I disagree vehemently. I think he wrote some exquisite music, but it's not music bludgeons you over the head. There's an understated quality about his music that rewards the listener in further listening. His music is atmospheric and it can all kind of "run together", but there's no mistaken his individuality as a composer.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

All the worst ones are the ones you don't like and the best ones are the ones you like. And vice-versa.

With special mention for Andrew Lord Webber-Douglas, who should be boiled in oil.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Neo Romanza said:


> Many listeners believe Frederick Delius to be one of the worst classical composers ever. I disagree vehemently. I think he wrote some exquisite music, but it's not music bludgeons you over the head. There's an understated quality about his music that rewards the listener in further listening. His music is atmospheric and it can all kind of "run together", but there's no mistaken his individuality as a composer.


Delius was a brilliant and underrated composer even though his music is literally just the epitome of orchestrated sex.


----------



## wormcycle (Oct 14, 2020)

The worst? I have no idea. The most boring goes to Tchaikovsky. He would make tons of money in Hollywood in the 30 and 50th.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

wormcycle said:


> The worst? I have no idea. The most boring goes to Tchaikovsky. He would make tons of money in Hollywood in the 30 and 50th.


It's more that his imitators _did_ make tons of money in Hollywood in the 30s and 50s! Chaplin for a start.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)




----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

Sorabji.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

sangpoincorporated said:


> The worst composer is Tony Villodas. His " "Threnody for Frank Zappa " or
> Google say
> jt productions "she dances in the wind" or
> " Zappa Beefheart "
> ...


I don't know Villodas. Frank Zappa was good enough that Pierre Boulez recorded an album of his classical pieces. So if Pierre is going to go through all the trouble to champion Zappa, then who are we to argue?

















Charles Ives, was (arguably) America's greatest composer. His importance was acknowledged by such luminaries as Leopold Stokowski, Leonard Bernstein, Eugene Ormandy, Seiji Ozawa, Micheal Tilson Thomas, Yo-Yo Ma, the Julliard String Quartet, and many others who recorded the works of Ives. Igor Stravinsky who once dismissed Ives, later came around to discuss how Ives' innovations in music came long before the likes of Schoenberg, Berg, Webern, Carter, and Stravinsky himself.

What made Ives America's greatest composer, in my opinion, is that he managed to create a whole new way of composing music that was different from the European tradition while still working within that tradition. If you take into account our greatest American composers such as Aaron Copland, Virgil Thomson, Samuel Barber, William Schuman, Walter Piston, Roy Harris, etc; each one, though very fine in their own ways, is more-or-less composing in the solid European tradition, even if they superimpose a bit of "Americana" in the picture. But Ives developed a style that was so different that he didn't even like the sound of polished and pristine orchestras, as much as liked to hear amateur musicians playing rough and off key. Legend has it that Ives attended a high school football game where the rival bands were playing two different songs at he same time, and THAT is the sound that Ives tries to recreate again and again.

Given an even chance, Ives is not so bad, and you may just come to like it!


----------



## PeterKC (Dec 30, 2016)

Ives. "The American original".

William Schuman. Not on my favorites list. Henry Cowell though, was one of our greats, and composed music over so many styles, it's almost hard to pin him down.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

wormcycle said:


> The worst? I have no idea. The most boring goes to Tchaikovsky. He would make tons of money in Hollywood in the 30 and 50th.


I used to think that too. I purchased my very first classical music LP back in the early 1980s. It was a budget reissue recording of Tchaikovsky's _1812 Overture_, _March Slav_, and _Romeo and Juliet Overture-Fantasy _by Leonard Bernstein and the New York Philharmonic Orchestra.










I played that record over and over again and decided at the tender age of about 14 that classical music was MY kind of music; and thanks to Tchaikovsky that never changed. And I was quick to purchase all the great works by Tchaikovsky: the Symphonies, the Violin Concerto, the Piano Concerto #1, the _Nutcracker_ and _Swan Lake_. In those days I had fallen big into the loud, colorful, and powerful orchestral works. So Tchaikovsky remained a favorite along with the likes of Beethoven, Wagner, Richard Strauss, Sibelius, and Shostakovich. But then there was a period of time when I began to find something in Tchaikovsky that was too sweet, too sentimental, and somewhat embarrassing. He became the favorite composer for people that don't know anything else about classical music, and so what use is Tchaikovsky for we elite, the few, who share the intellect and the insight to appreciate, understand, and enjoy, the full spectrum of classical music from Bach, through Beethoven, Wagner, Stravinsky, and Schoenberg? 

One of the reasons Tchaikovsky is so great is BECAUSE he speaks to everyone! Who DOESN'T like the _1812 Overture_? What three-year old can resist NOT dancing around the living room when you put _The Nutcracker_ on? Though the endless chain of catchy melodies that Tchaikovsky brings forth are enough to make him popular with everyone (except for some of the snobs), he was also very aware of form, and he struggled with it. Tcahikovsky's model and favorite composer was Mozart who he once identified as a "Musical Christ". Tchaikovsky was often very critical of his own works, and especially the symphonies, because he wanted all those beautiful melodies to be tied together in a way that was seamless, like Mozart; and of course, if your'e going to use Mozart as the benchmark then you're bound to be disappointed. 

While Tchaikovsky was criticized by the Balakirev school as too cosmopolitan and too interested in the German model; Tchaikovsky is still very Russian, maybe even MORE Russian than those Mighty Five, because Tchaikovsky's sad, Russian, soulfulness, comes from the inside. Instead of TRYING to be Russian, Tchaikovsky just IS Russian and even if he's trying to compose a symphony in that tradition of Beethoven or Mozart, his will always sound Russian because that's who Tchaikovsky is. And even members of the Balakirev camp came to understand that about Tchaikovsky, so that even Balakirev and Rimsky-Korsakov came around to give Tchaikovsky credit where credit is due. 

Other Russian composers followed: Rachmaninoff comes straight out of Tchaikovsky, catchy melodies and all. While Shostakovich's early works such as _Symphony #1_, _Piano Concerto #1_, _Age of Gold_, and the _Jazz Suites_, follow in the direction of Stravinsky and Prokofiev; a large dose of Tchaikovsky's sad, Russian, soulfulness seems to permeate the Shostakovich symphonies, starting with the _Fifth_. And then Igor Stravinsky, who became the father of the so-called Neo-Classical movement in music, was also a great Tchaikovsky fan. One would think that as Stravinsky was striving for a sound that was tight, cool, intellectual, and balanced, that Tchaikovsky's thoroughly "Romantic" musical vision would be the exact opposite; but no, and Stravinsky's_ The Fairy's Kiss_ is a homage to the master. 

I once read in the preface of a biography on Tchaikovsky that while Beethoven is considered the GREATEST composer, Tchaikovsky is considered to be the most LOVED, and not by the elites or the snobs, but by the masses. And that has got to count for something.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

PeterKC said:


> Ives. "The American original".
> 
> William Schuman. Not on my favorites list. Henry Cowell though, was one of our greats, and composed music over so many styles, it's almost hard to pin him down.


Henry Cowell was a great American composer who I think followed squarely in the spirit of Ives. Though Cowell's orchestral works are entertaining and pleasant enough, his piano works are much more innovative and interesting. As Cowell takes Ives' piano technique to the next level, using rulers and tone clusters, Cowell's piano miniatures becomes the link between Ives' _Concord Sonata_, and John Cage's _Sonatas for Prepared Piano_. 










William Schuman, I know, is a tough nut to crack. He doesn't offer much in the way of melody. And though, Schuman is technically tonal, it's often so thorny that it may as well be serial. Like Walter Piston, Schuman was a great "academic", a musician's musician, uplifted by fellow academics but not so much by the fans. While a handful of Schuman's works were recorded in his own lifetime by the likes of Eugene Ormandy, George Szell, and especially Leonard Bernstein; it wasn't until the good people of NAXOS finally gave Schuman his due:

















Even so, Schuman's most beautiful and accessible work, the _Song of Orpheus_ for cello and orchestra is still very hard to find in CD form.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

hammeredklavier said:


> Well, I'm _sure_ they're just jealous they can't make as much money as he does.


Not necessarily jealous. I think that some people feel the need to snubbing popular works simply to feel superior than the masses, so they say that it's bad music despite the fact that their ears suggest that it's good music.

However it might be that the music of John Williams is popular only because it's inserted in popular films. If he composed neoromantic concert works with the same melodies maybe he would be in the same waters of many other contemporary classical music composers.


----------



## PeterKC (Dec 30, 2016)

Yes, Seattle and Schwarz did a lot to get the American Symphonists known through the Delos recordings of Hanson, Diamond and Schuman. I wonder why they stalled out on the symphonies of Cowell, and my favorite academic, Peter Mennin. Probably ran out of funding. Someone really needs to do a Cowell cycle.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

Gallus said:


> Sorabji.


It's maybe unfair but I've always distrusted composers whose entire reputation seems to rest on their works being excessively virtuosic or difficult to play. So pretty much him and Alkan.


----------

