We have all kinds of polls on really big names; how about one on not so famous / downright obscure composers?
So, who are your top 10 such composers?
I´ll start.
Attilio Ariosti - viola da gamba sonatas
Domenico Zipoli - keyboard music
Baldassare Galuppi - keyboard sonatas, sounding best on piano
Manuel Blasco de Nebras - ditto
Gaetano Brunetti - symphonies, string quartets and trios
Franz Krommer - chamber music and concertos
Joseph Rheinberger, Heinrich von Herzogenberg - chamber music
Felix Weingartner - symphonies and string quartets
Pavel Chesnokov -sacred music
Honorary mention: Dario Castello, Biaggio Marini, Francesco Maria Veracini, Johann Gottfried Müthel, Franz Danzi, Muzio Clementi, John Field, Louis Spohr, Georges Onslow, Ernesto Lecuona
Your turn.
My collection is full of neglected and obscure composers, so many in fact that i could name a thousand and still many to go. Most of them I love, and are easily favourites, but to name them would be utterly impossible. Herzogenberg among them, but also the compositions of his wife, Elisabeth, and Weingartner is a all time favourite, after all I have all what is recorded save for the vocal works. Rheinberger also, and so on and on. The difference with you and me is that I have them all on place 1.
Okay two CD'S arrived today with composers I love.
1) Johann Abraham Schmierer and Gottfried Finger.
One person's obscure composer is another's household name. Mine are maybe not that obscure. Not ten but let me name a few:
Qu Xiaosong
Havergal Brian (OK, not so obscure here)
George Perle
Markevitch
Arthur Foote
Furtwangler
Isang Yun
Schnabel
Rzewski
My philosophy is that in this day and age if you are obscure you deserve it. Cream rises to the top and shit flows downhill, these are the rules of nature.
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on July 26, 2016, 10:41:03 AM
My philosophy is that in this day and age if you are obscure you deserve it. Cream rises to the top and shit flows downhill, these are the rules of nature.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1800,
JS Bach would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1830,
Schubert would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1930,
Mahler would have never been rescued from obscurity.
Just saying.
(Not to mention that when it comes to politics, the exact opposite of your "rules" stands... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: )
Quote from: Florestan on July 26, 2016, 10:53:06 AM
If this philosophy were frozen in 1800, JS Bach would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1830, Schubert would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1930, Mahler would have never been rescued from obscurity.
Just saying.
Don't forget Vivaldi!
Quote from: Florestan on July 26, 2016, 10:53:06 AM
If this philosophy were frozen in 1800, JS Bach would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1830, Schubert would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1930, Mahler would have never been rescued from obscurity.
Just saying.
(Not to mention that when it comes to politics, the exact opposite of your philosophy stands... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: )
I think
PerfectWagnerite didn't pass Dynamics 101,
Andrei. ;)
Quote from: Brian on July 26, 2016, 10:54:14 AM
Don't forget Vivaldi!
Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!Quote from: North Star on July 26, 2016, 10:56:35 AM
I think PerfectWagnerite didn't pass Dynamics 101, Andrei. ;)
:D :D :D
Quote from: Florestan on July 26, 2016, 10:53:06 AM
If this philosophy were frozen in 1800, JS Bach would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1830, Schubert would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1930, Mahler would have never been rescued from obscurity.
Just saying.
(Not to mention that when it comes to politics, the exact opposite of your "rules" stands... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: )
And which one of the 2 dozen names would you say are on a level with Bach or Schubert or Mahler? This is the 21st century, anyone and everyone has access to scores and recordings. I just don't subscribe to the idea that there are tons of neglected music out there that is somehow great and that we are doing their composers a disservice but not performing them.
Bach might not have been performed much after his death but he was NOT obscure amongst composers. Mozart, Beethoven, and many others knew his music very well.
In the case of Mahler his reputation as a great conductor during his lifetime was such that it just took awhile for his music to sink in. The so-called Mahler revival as only several decades after his death and really isn't all that unusual.
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on July 26, 2016, 11:04:13 AM
And which one of the 2 dozen names would you say are on a level with Bach or Schubert or Mahler?
This is not a good response to Florestan - he can still be correct even if there is nobody on a level with J.S. Bach, because his point is that major composers often do fall into obscurity.
You could have made a better argument by saying that in this age of recording, we now have a fair chance to assess even the most obscure composers. But the opinions of scholars and other canon-creators - notably major orchestras - have not caught up to the producers at Naxos, CPO, and ECM New Series.
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on July 26, 2016, 11:04:13 AM
And which one of the 2 dozen names would you say are on a level with Bach or Schubert or Mahler?
I would confidently say that when it comes to piano music, Manuel Blasco de Nebras is a worthy precursor of Schubert; and that when it comes to chamber music, Rheinberger and von Herzogenberg are worthy contemporaries of Brahms; and when it comes to symphonies, Felix Weingartner is not far behind Mahler. And a question, if I may: have you ever heard anything of their music?
But then again, the topic is about one´s top 10
favorite obscure composers. You seem to subscribe to the good ol´ fallacy of equating
favorite with
best.
And you also seem to take a poll intended for mere entertainment and (why not?) discovering new things, way too seriously.
And one final point: life´s too short to concentrate only on the great names...
The claim is not that Spohr (who was well known throughout the 19th century) is on a level with (the best) Schubert but that there is some worthwhile music by Spohr.
Not that much Schubert is on the level of Schubert's String quintet either but most people do not stop listening to his "Trout quintet" or the first six symphonies for that reason.
Spohr's clarinet concerti are about as good as Weber's and his mixed chamber music (nonet etc.) is also pretty good. Not quite up with Schubert's octet but not so far behind to deserve obscurity if one likes this kind of music with winds. And those pieces are somewhat frequently played and recorded. The (4) double quartets are also interesting works (there is a complete recording by the academy of st martins chamber group on hyperion), a little "slick" sometimes but (I think) worth listening to in preference of one's 7th recording of the Trout or the Mendelssohn octet.
I admittedly was somewhat bored by the symphonies I have heard and not too wild about the violin concertos and I have not heard the Faust opera that was famous until around 1900 or so but I should probably revisit them. For the mentioned chamber music and clarinet concertos, Spohr deserves a place on my 10 favorite obscures list.
Quote from: Jo498 on July 26, 2016, 11:28:52 AM
The claim is not that Spohr (who was well known throughout the 19th century) is on a level with (the best) Schubert but that there is some worthwhile music by Spohr. Not that much Schubert is on the level of Schubert's String quintet either but most people do not stop listening to his "Trout quintet" or the first six symphonies for that reason.
Exactly.
QuoteSpohr's clarinet concerti are about as good as Weber's and his mixed chamber music (nonet etc.) is also pretty good. Not quite up with Schubert's octet but not so far behind to deserve obscurity if one likes this kind of music with winds.
Exactly.
QuoteAnd those pieces are somewhat frequently played and recorded. The (4) double quartets are also interesting works (there is a complete recording by the academy of st martins chamber group on hyperion), a little "slick" sometimes but (I think) worth listening to in preference of one's 7th recording of the Trout or the Mendelssohn octet.
Exactly.
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on July 26, 2016, 10:41:03 AM
My philosophy is that in this day and age if you are obscure you deserve it. Cream rises to the top and shit flows downhill, these are the rules of nature.
Your philosophy deserves to be obscure. :)
Quote from: Florestan on July 26, 2016, 10:53:06 AM
If this philosophy were frozen in 1800, JS Bach would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1830, Schubert would have never been rescued from obscurity.
If this philosophy were frozen in 1930, Mahler would have never been rescued from obscurity.
Just saying.
One of Florestan's rare moments of actual wisdom, take note guys!
Thinking about the state of the world at the moment, this age of information and technology makes the notion of obscurity markedly different to what obscurity was 100 years ago. Every single composer we listen to has recordings of their music, often these recordings are easily accessible on spotify or easily bought from amazon, their biographies on wikipedia are easily found and their music is studied and written about at a scholarly level in addition to being enjoyed by any classical music fan.
I could easily say Anthony Pateras, is an 'obscure composer' but I can also say that I could easily listen to his music online, buy CDs of his music and see his music performed live as easily as I can see anything by Bach, Mozart or Beethoven. The 'live music' aspect might not be so easy for people in other areas of the world, but in reality it is so easy to become acquainted with his music if one has the incentive to.
Jehan Alain
Lili Boulanger
Julian Carrillo
Johann David Heinichen
Johann (Jan) Kalliwoda
Etienne Mehul
Jerome Moross
Hans Rott
Sergei Protopopov
Ivan Wyschnegradsky
Catch-22: if I have heard of him, he's not obscure.
Is Lou Harrison or Virgil Thomson obscure? Frank Martin? I think not. Simeon ten Holt was but certainly isn't any longer. Both Fitkins are good.
Douwe Eisenga
My list would be (though I may be forgetting someone):
Eyvind Alnaes
Michael Haydn
Edward German
Eric Coates
Eduard and Richard Franck
Louise Farrenc
Franz Xaver Richter
Norbert Burgmuller
Louis Theodore Gouvy
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on July 26, 2016, 10:41:03 AM
My philosophy is that in this day and age if you are obscure you deserve it. Cream rises to the top and shit flows downhill, these are the rules of nature.
Nature has nothing to do with it. Much of the standard repertoire is based on fashion, politics, penny-pinching, and the contingencies of history.
Mine are mostly 20th Century - an era that is still in the process of being sorted out, party due to the predominance of Modernism in the second half. But no, that's only about culture, no rules of nature here. :)
Ruth Gipps
William Wordsworth
Arnold Cooke
Marc Lavry
Sulkhan Tsintsadze
Anthon van der Horst
Leon Orthel
John Kinsella
Eivind Groven
Charles Tournemire - as a symphonist
What's obscure on a forum where we already revel in the obscure? Hard list to make, and kind of arbitrary.
Arnold Cooke (oops, see, someone already mentioned him while I was composing this post!)
Josten
Moyzes
Nelhybel
Nørholm
Josef Reicha (uncle of Anton)
Riisager
Santoro
Sgambati
Titz
Quote from: Daverz on July 26, 2016, 10:49:33 PM
What's obscure on a forum where we already revel in the obscure? Hard list to make, and kind of arbitrary.
Still a lot if http://imslp.org/wiki/Special:Random is any judge:
Charles Wels (1825-1906)
Hieronymus Kradenthaller (1637-1700)
Tranquille Berbiguier (1782-1838)
Johann Franz Xaver Sterkel (1750-1817)
Hans Leo Hassler (1564-1612)
Theodore Oesten (1813-1870)
Julian Edwards (1855-1910)
Benjamin Dwight Allen (1831-1914)
Clémence de Grandval (1828-1907)
Georges Lamothe (1837 or 1842-1894)
Apart from random works by Vieuxtemps, Grieg, Cimarosa, Dunstaple and Liszt, all of whom were too well-known to be included in my list. Still, that's obscure composers 2 for 1.
Of course, all of those ten composers are unsung geniuses and I will campaign tirelessly for their recognition.
At least I know one piece by Hassler..
https://www.youtube.com/v/dHS5-sGF5g8
Hassler is the only name I know from amw's list and I have heard some pieces. A few are somewhat frequently included in Renaissance choral anthologies. Namely the secular setting "Mein Gmüth ist mir verwirret" (My mind is confused because of a tender maiden) the melody of which became the famous passion hymn "O Haupt voll Blut und Wunden".
Compared to those, even to Hassler, Spohr is hardly obscure but rather famous...
Quote from: Jo498 on July 27, 2016, 12:37:32 AM
Hassler is the only name I know from amw's list and I have heard some pieces. A few are somewhat frequently included in Renaissance choral anthologies. Namely the secular setting "Mein Gmüth ist mir verwirret" (My mind is confused because of a tender maiden) the melody of which became the famous passion hymn "O Haupt voll Blut und Wunden".
That's because there is one disc available out of 8. The other two, Sterkel and Hassler, are not obscue enough, both with multiple discs available (particularly Hassler).
Quote from: jessop on July 26, 2016, 04:30:46 PM
One of Florestan's rare moments of actual wisdom, take note guys!
This goes both ways, lad! --- one of Jessop´s rare moments of actually recognizing wisdom when he sees it. ;D
Quote from: Florestan on July 27, 2016, 12:47:38 AM
This goes both ways, lad! --- one of Jessop´s rare moments of actually recognizing wisdom when he sees it. ;D
:P ;D
Elena Kats-Chernin (1957- )
Ruth Gipps (1921-99)
Richard Wetz (1875-1935)
Hans Gál (1890-1987)
Ernst Pepping (1901-81)
Nicola Matteis (1650-1700)
Daniel Jones (1912-93)
Hans Huber (1852-1921)
Hans Rott (1858-84)
Havergal Brian (1876-1972)
Siegfried Wagner (1869-1930)
Quote from: Jo498 on July 27, 2016, 12:37:32 AM
"Mein Gmüth ist mir verwirret" (My mind is confused because of a tender maiden)
hahahhahaha
It was a quick translation, maybe not idiomatic, but literal. The text is in early modern German with odd spellings.
The first stanza of 5
Mein Gmüth ist mir verwirret,
das macht ein Jungfrau zart,
bin ganz und gar verirret,
mein Herz das kränckt sich hart,
hab tag und nacht kein Ruh,
führ allzeit grosse klag,
thu stets seufftzen und weinen,
in trauren schier verzag.
There is a performance on youtube, but not very good, so I am not linking it.
A good one is track 15 on Amarcord's Book of Madrigals
[asin]B000MV9F4E[/asin]
Quote from: Cato on July 26, 2016, 04:45:39 PM
Jehan Alain
Lili Boulanger
Julian Carrillo
Johann David Heinichen
Johann (Jan) Kalliwoda
Etienne Mehul
Jerome Moross
Hans Rott
Sergei Protopopov
Ivan Wyschnegradsky
An honorable Eleventh:
Leo Ornstein !
https://www.youtube.com/v/Ii3oEVz1rVg
Quote from: Cato on July 28, 2016, 05:44:15 AM
An honorable Eleventh: Leo Ornstein !
Ornstein is one of my favourite piano composers! Also composer of the best Piano Quintet in the world omg is he really actually obscure?
Quote from: Daverz on July 26, 2016, 10:32:04 PM
Nature has nothing to do with it. Much of the standard repertoire is based on fashion, politics, penny-pinching, and the contingencies of history.
Much as I love many unsung composers, I disagree. Much of the canon is standard because it is superb, and most unsungs are far from that quality. But that is not to say much of them is not worth hearing. And there are many nuggets that could have been in the canon but for historical contingencies.
"obscure" lumps together very different composers. It only means that today they are not very well known. But some of them were famous composers in there lifetime (like Spohr), others died very young and never really had a chance (like Rott), others were of middling fame or comparably obscure even in their day. Although anyone whose music was copied and printed and is available on paper or even disc today is far less obscure than hundreds of others.
Because they are a diverse bunch there are different causes why they are obscure today.
Quote from: Daverz on July 26, 2016, 10:32:04 PM
Much of the standard repertoire is based on fashion,
Examples, please.
Quote
politics,
Examples, please.
Quote
penny-pinching,
Examples, please.
Quote
and the contingencies of history.
Examples, please.
Quote from: The new erato on July 28, 2016, 09:20:42 PM
Much as I love many unsung composers, I disagree. Much of the canon is standard because it is superb, and most unsungs are far from that quality.
Superb is such a vague term... How do you define it?
Quote from: Jo498 on July 29, 2016, 12:32:27 AM
Because they are a diverse bunch there are different causes why they are obscure today.
Hear, hear!
Such a shame that we have to resort to descriptors such as 'superb' and 'far from that quality' as if this is the main reason of whether music is well known or not.....
Oh wait! We don't have to! And we don't even have to generalise! We can consider each composer as a different and separate case of whether their music was performed and published much or very little! We can consider the difference in technology and available information at different points in history up to this day and see how this impacts what is well known and what isn't.
Once we get over the hindrance of completely arbitrary adjectives that provide absolutely no insight to music or history apart from personal taste (or lack thereof) then we can look at the individuals in history.........what was the impact of the introduction of public subscription series? Patrons? New music organisations and ensembles? Scholars, academic journals? Composers who taught at conservatoires? Critics? Commissioning programs? Composition awards? The church? The rise of the recording industry? Government funded classical music versus privately funded classical music? And what about the concurrent existence of popular music and musicians throughout history? So many things to think about that I would rather leave up to my musicologist pals with degrees in areas such as these and more........
Quote from: jessop on July 28, 2016, 08:52:00 PM
Ornstein is one of my favourite piano composers! Also composer of the best Piano Quintet in the world omg is he really actually obscure?
I fear so, even though he lived to be 108!
From Wikipedia's entry on him:
QuoteOrnstein's primary compositional style was changing as well. As described by latter-day critic Gordon Rumson, his
"musical language organised itself into a shimmering, luminous gradation between simplicity and harshness. The melodies have a Hebraic tint, and Ornstein does not shy from placing dissonant and tonal music side by side. This shifting of style is just one of Ornstein's creative tools. More importantly, there is a directness of emotion that makes the music genuinely appealing. It should also be noted that his music is ideally written for the piano and is clearly the work of a master pianist."[22]
This transformation contributed to Ornstein's fade into obscurity. Those whom he had inspired now rejected him, almost as vehemently as the critics he had shocked a decade earlier. "[H]e had been radical modernism's poster boy throughout the 1910s, and when he abandoned that style for one more expressive the ultramoderns reacted as a lover scorned", according to Broyles. "Not even Cowell, known for his accepting temperament, could forgive Ornstein."[
My emphasis above.
The Ornstein pianoconcerto is terrific: https://youtu.be/s9zpBnn8Flk
Piano Concerto (1921/23)
Pianist : Alain Feinberg
Dir : Leon Botstein
American Symphony Orchestra
1- Moderato assai -- Allegro con moto (16.50)
2- Andante (8.02)
3- Allegro (9.51)
P.
Quote from: pjme on July 29, 2016, 05:31:24 AM
The Ornstein pianoconcerto is terrific: https://youtu.be/s9zpBnn8Flk
Piano Concerto (1921/23)
Pianist : Alain Feinberg
Dir : Leon Botstein
American Symphony Orchestra
1- Moderato assai -- Allegro con moto (16.50)
2- Andante (8.02)
3- Allegro (9.51)
P.
Great piece, i agree 8)
Score at http://ks.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/f/f1/IMSLP378725-PMLP611307-ornsteinpianoconcertofullscore.pdf
I agree with Furtwangler. Pettersson is an excellent but neglected composer.
1. Havergal Brian
2. George Lloyd
3. William Alwyn
4. William Mathias
5. Arnold Bax
6. Krzysztof Penderecki
7. Michael Daugherty
8. Boris Tishchenko
9. Daniel Jones
10. York Bowen
Quote from: Maestro267 on August 02, 2016, 01:39:34 AM6. Krzysztof Penderecki
How is Penderecki obscure? His music was featured in
The Shining,
The Exorcist, and more recently
Shutter Island. Also, his music seems to have found cross-over appeal thanks in part to Radiohead guitarist, Jonny Greenwood. His music has a larger audience than any of the other composers in your list and he's regarded time and time again as one of the greatest composers of the 20th Century.
Quote from: Mirror Image on August 02, 2016, 01:38:58 PM
How is Penderecki obscure?
For many even Jean-Philippe Rameau is obscure! I don't even try to make my list, because the obscurity of composers is so controversal.
Quote from: Mirror Image on August 02, 2016, 01:38:58 PM
How is Penderecki obscure? His music was featured in The Shining, The Exorcist, and more recently Shutter Island. Also, his music seems to have found cross-over appeal thanks in part to Radiohead guitarist, Jonny Greenwood. His music has a larger audience than any of the other composers in your list and he's regarded time and time again as one of the greatest composers of the 20th Century.
Well I can assure you that most of the world's population have not seen any of those films. :)
Quote from: jessop on August 03, 2016, 12:53:04 AM
Well I can assure you that most of the world's population have not seen any of those films. :)
With that kind of logic, all composers are obscure.
It is often fuzzy, but from Maestro267's list, I'd say that Penderecki clearly is the least obscure.
He certainly is among the most famous living composers and among the best known ones of the last 50 years.
Whereas I would call all others on that list, except for Bax and maybe Brian, quite obscure. I recognize most of the names and I think they are all 20th century composers, but I don't think I have heard any of their music or would know where to put them stylistically.
Quote from: Christo on July 26, 2016, 10:48:22 PM
Mine are mostly 20th Century - an era that is still in the process of being sorted out, party due to the predominance of Modernism in the second half. But no, that's only about culture, no rules of nature here. :)
Ruth Gipps
William Wordsworth
Arnold Cooke
Marc Lavry
Sulkhan Tsintsadze
Anthon van der Horst
Leon Orthel
John Kinsella
Eivind Groven
Charles Tournemire - as a symphonist
Great list with which I largely agree (don't know nos 5 and 6). Nice to see Lavry mentioned here. I only know 'Emek' which I like very much.
My list for today:
Klaus Egge
John Kinsella
Popov
Rootham
Kurka
Madetoja
Bate
Arnell
Balanchivadze
Ivanovs
You call Madetoja obscure? He has a concert hall and conservatory named after him in my hometown! :P
Quote from: North Star on August 03, 2016, 12:54:17 AMWith that kind of logic, all composers are obscure.
They are. Most of my students aren't even aware of the sheer existence of composers
überhaupt. :)
Quote from: Christo on August 03, 2016, 03:05:43 AM
They are. Most of my students aren't even aware of the sheer existence of composers überhaupt. :)
Sure, but, as most things, this is relative. If we define obscurity so broadly, it is utterly meaningless.
Quote from: Maestro267 on August 02, 2016, 01:39:34 AM
2. George Lloyd
Ackk!!! How did I forget Lloyd when making my list? Well, that proves his obscurity, I guess, when even I forget him ;D
Sarge
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on August 03, 2016, 03:18:16 AMAkkk!!! How did I forget Lloyd when making my list? Well, that proves his obscurity, I guess, when even I forget him ;D
Sarge
Let's change this thread's title into 'Your Top 10 Favourite Obscure Composers Even Sarge Won't Think About'.
I agree with every list which have no names I recognise :P
Quote from: North Star on August 03, 2016, 02:37:32 AM
You call Madetoja obscure? He has a concert hall and conservatory named after him in my hometown! :P
But the question is: how well is Madetoja's music known outside of Finland?
Quote from: Mirror Image on August 03, 2016, 06:39:36 AM
But the question is: how well is Madetoja's music known outside of Finland?
How well are Roy Harris, Walter Piston and Howard Hanson known outside of the US?
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on August 03, 2016, 07:34:00 AM
How well are Roy Harris, Walter Piston and Howard Hanson known outside of the US?
From my limited experience slightly better than Madetoja, but I would accept all as (considerably) more obscure than Penderecki. The latter was somewhat notorious for a few works in the 1960s (St. Luke's Passion, Threnos etc.) and he is at least well known as a name.
Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on August 03, 2016, 07:34:00 AM
How well are Roy Harris, Walter Piston and Howard Hanson known outside of the US?
Is this a game you're trying to play with me? Anyway, my main point about Penderecki still stands. He's not obscure and is the most well-known composer mentioned so far.
and don't overlook Penderecki's score to The Saragossa Manuscript, the "Polish Tristam Shandy'
some composers I have in my collection that I would like to hear more of, may be neither great nor favourites but on my "more of" list
Armen TIGRANIAN (David-Beg, Anush)
Joby TALBOT (Path of Miracles)
Jakov GOTOVAC (Ero the Joker, Morana)
Enrico CHAPELA (Inguesu)
Michael Conway BAKER (Washington Square, Flute Concerto)
Fran LHOTKA (Davo u selu )
Re. Penderecki: I still count him as obscure because he hardly ever gets programmed in the concert hall here in the UK, and even then it's only the short "concert openers" that get an outing. Of course there are exceptions, but they are exactly that. I mean, there are 7 symphonies and a swathe of great choral works that could be programmed as post-interval, main-item fare.
I'm glad most people agree with most of my list though. I usually expect a battering when I list neglected composers.
Quote from: Maestro267 on August 05, 2016, 07:27:10 AM
Re. Penderecki: I still count him as obscure because he hardly ever gets programmed in the concert hall here in the UK, and even then it's only the short "concert openers" that get an outing. Of course there are exceptions, but they are exactly that. I mean, there are 7 symphonies and a swathe of great choral works that could be programmed as post-interval, main-item fare.
I'm glad most people agree with most of my list though. I usually expect a battering when I list neglected composers.
Obscure is a matter of perspective. I think you have it right. No worries...
Above I kind of nominated Spohr. Another fairly obscure composer I found worthwhile is Joseph Martin Kraus, sometimes called "the Swedish Mozart" which is misleading because he was born and raised in Germany but for most of his professional life employed at the Swedish court by the King Gustav III. whose assassination was the inspiration for Verdi's Ballon in maschera. Kraus shares Mozart's birth year and only lived a little longer, dying from tuberculosis in late 1792.
While I have also a disc with string quartets, I mainly recommend his symphonies. They might be best described as mixing the Gluckian opera style with the classical symphony. That is they are often rather serious and dramatic.
I love Spohr's music! :)
I can't name 10, but Franz Schmidt would qualify as one.
Perhaps the question is why are certain composers still in obscurity.
Some deserve the obscurity but others like Schmidt and Schuman deserve better, in my opinion.
Quote from: hpowders on September 17, 2016, 04:43:17 PM
Some deserve the obscurity but others like Schmidt and Schuman deserve better, in my opinion.
And Pejacevic deserves to be rather more well known imo
The idea of obscurity is a bit of a conundrum for me since I am a band junkie.
Schuman, Mennin and Persichetti may be obscure composer to the general classical music population but to bank junkies there band works are frequently performed.
For example, I frequently perform the band versions that Schuman prepared for the New England Tryptic. One of the bands I play with performs the Chester Overture every year at July 4th Celebration at Mount Vernon.
Quote from: jessop on September 17, 2016, 04:55:23 PM
And Pejacevic deserves to be rather more well known imo
I asked around in some Tampa bars. Sure enough nobody ever heard of Pejacevic.
Do you drink in the right bars?
Quote from: hpowders on September 17, 2016, 05:36:49 PM
I asked around in some Tampa bars. Sure enough nobody ever heard of Pejacevic.
I guess she qualifies then!
Quote from: hpowders on September 17, 2016, 05:36:49 PM
I asked around in some Tampa bars. Sure enough nobody ever heard of Pejacevic.
I have never heard of Pejacevic either so I went to YT and found a few works.
This is :
Symphony in F sharp minor, Op. 41 I only listened to about 2-3 min but it seemed OK to me annd I will follow up.
https://www.youtube.com/v/940dNX5zHEU
Quote from: hpowders on September 17, 2016, 04:43:17 PM
Some deserve the obscurity but others like Schmidt and Schuman deserve better, in my opinion.
I would not call Schuman or Schmidt obscure at all.
This thread needs a reasonable metric. How about:
Composers must have no more than 5 available monographic recordings.
Quote from: nathanb on September 18, 2016, 05:53:24 AM
I would not call Schuman or Schmidt obscure at all.
This thread needs a reasonable metric. How about:
Composers must have no more than 5 available monographic recordings.
Indeed, Mr. B. Indeed
I would add one other criterion:
If a commercial recording of any of their work is up on Youtube, even despite the fact that composer was, say, a Croatian female of mixed African-Asian-Slavic descent who had a wooden leg, was at least bisexual (i.e. five ways a minority), and who wrote generic and forgettable late romantic works, for example, that composer is not obscure.
Quote from: hpowders on September 17, 2016, 05:36:49 PM
I asked around in some Tampa bars. Sure enough nobody ever heard of Pejacevic.
Not a largish Croatian immigrant community in Tampa?
Pity, because that means you're missing out on experiencing a
Dora Pejacevic cocktail at your local watering hole! For only three bucks each during happy hour, you can afford to belt down several while you listen to her Symphony, Piano Concerto and chamber music being played through the ceiling speakers as background music.
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on September 18, 2016, 07:20:03 AM
Not a largish Croatian immigrant community in Tampa?
Pity, because that means you're missing out on experiencing a Dora Pejacevic cocktail at your local watering hole! For only three bucks each during happy hour, you can afford to belt down several while you listen to her Symphony, Piano Concerto and chamber music being played through the ceiling speakers as background music.
One guy thought Pejacevic was playing in the US Open Tennis final match.
Re Dora Pejacevic, I listened to the F# Sym and the P Trio in C also the e min Cello son (on YT) and quite frankly found them very ordinary nothing I heard made me want to hear more, they were IMO "Bland" I will add the chamber works were slightly better than the symphony.
Quote from: Andante on September 18, 2016, 12:59:07 PM
Re Dora Pejacevic, I listened to the F# Sym and the P Trio in C also the e min Cello son (on YT) and quite frankly found them very ordinary nothing I heard made me want to hear more, they were IMO "Bland" I will add the chamber works were slightly better than the symphony.
That's what I found, generic, with a touch of 'bourgeois salon music flavor' in the lightness of some ideas, and imminently forgettable. "Listenable," I suppose, but so much second and third tier music is that, i.e. listenable, lol.
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on September 18, 2016, 07:07:17 AM
Indeed, Mr. B. Indeed
I would add one other criterion:
If a commercial recording of any of their work is up on Youtube, even despite the fact that composer was, say, a Croatian female of mixed African-Asian-Slavic descent who had a wooden leg, was at least bisexual (i.e. five ways a minority), and who wrote generic and forgettable late romantic works, for example, that composer is not obscure.
That's a little more limiting, but I can still work with it.
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on September 19, 2016, 12:28:48 AM
That's what I found, generic, with a touch of 'bourgeois salon music flavor' in the lightness of some ideas, and imminently forgettable. "Listenable," I suppose, but so much second and third tier music is that, i.e. listenable, lol.
I think that about sums up why they are obscure, at least 99% of the time.
Quote from: Thatfabulousalien on September 19, 2016, 08:14:52 PM
Is Korndorf obscure enough?
Korngold and Dittersdorf had a baby? ???
Quote from: Thatfabulousalien on September 19, 2016, 08:14:52 PM
Is Korndorf obscure enough?
I discovered him early in the year and have loved many of his works to death!
I could make a list but I'd need to sort through my collection
Hymn III gets my vote!
Quote from: Mirror Image on September 19, 2016, 08:17:45 PM
Korngold and Dittersdorf had a baby? ???
A-yep. Nikolai Sergeevich Korndorf (1947 - 2001) nine lbs, eight oz. at birth. Big kid.
Vittorio Borgonovi
Richard Stone
Augusto Poppeliers
Valerij Bondarenko
yeah I thought I'd just start making up names and see what happens
Quote from: Andante on September 19, 2016, 07:46:24 PM
I think that about sums up why they are obscure, at least 99% of the time.
I tend to agree with this actually. Even though I do like Pejacevic (some of her music just sounds like some nice 19th century music I listen to when I'm in the mood) I can see how the approach of some composers will end them up in relative musical obscurity especially when a composer writes in a populist and unoriginal style (like 19th C 'salon music').
Quote from: jessop on September 20, 2016, 01:54:13 PM
I can see how the approach of some composers will end them up in relative musical obscurity especially when a composer writes in a populist and unoriginal style (like 19th C 'salon music').
You should take into account, though, that (1) the "populist and unoriginal" 19th century "salon music" fulfilled social, cultural and educational functions that today are lost, and (2) concern for originality or for how the posterity will judge their music was the last thing composers had in mind, if at all.
Quote from: Florestan on September 21, 2016, 06:30:54 AM
You should take into account, though, that (1) the "populist and unoriginal" 19th century "salon music" fulfilled social, cultural and educational functions that today are lost, and (2) concern for originality or for how the posterity will judge their music was the last thing composers had in mind, if at all.
I really do enjoy that music though; it's a window into a certain time and place that we can't visit without a time machine! The social, cultural and educational functions of music of that time do have some parallels with the use of some genres of music today. I think there is an audience for anything though, and functions of music change with time. The fact that this music still exists and can be studied and enjoyed is so important to the understanding of history through arts and culture that I wouldn't dare dismiss it.
Quote from: Florestan on September 21, 2016, 06:30:54 AM
You should take into account, though, that (1) the "populist and unoriginal" 19th century "salon music" fulfilled social, cultural and educational functions that today are lost, and (2) concern for originality or for how the posterity will judge their music was the last thing composers had in mind, if at all.
Gebrauchsmusik of a sort, then. Meant to fill a slight void like the ambiance of wallpaper does to a room....
Fine. But
Q: Why then, compose
a concerto, for which, even in the convention of the day, assumed a full front and center of the listener's attention?
A: To provide pleasant and non-challenging music for a relatively non-discerning bourgeois audience who just 'wanted a bit of music' when they attended a concert.
That said, there is a lot of well made music, several tons at least of symphonic, concertante and chamber works, made by composers whose talents and imaginations were a perfect fit to that audience. There is 'a place' for it, and a legitimate reason for this well-crafted but later mainly forgettable music.
Quote from: Florestan on September 21, 2016, 06:30:54 AM
"salon music" fulfilled social, cultural and educational functions that today are lost."
I would have written "
past functions of another era," and left the sentimental judgement or implicit tone of regret out of the equation, because I see no deeply inherent later value in what is basically a slight piece of pop music with its "do not consume after this date" label so clearly on the tin from the moment it was written. As a period document, like any more temporarily popular trend or the design of a bottle, these works are markers of a time and some of its slighter sentiments, those being less than the more 'profound' works from the same era that have stayed in circulation.
Sure, this kind of rep is a sort of temperature read on now dead patients of the past. There is more to be truly learned about a past culture through its mundane personal correspondences between average folk than there is to be had from their general taste of the decade for what amounts to a musical tchotchke.
Well, I can go along with the social aspect anyway, and maybe even the cultural since that includes the finest art to the lowest kitsch, but what is educational -- then or now -- about sitting through a basically trite piece of music even as insipid background to a social function? Earlier eras also had their 'tafel musik' and music as background, Renaissance lute pieces, chamber works, as did the Baroque and Classical eras. And much of that we still listen to, with full attention due to some quality and a greater staying power. It seems the fluffiest of this genre was produced in the late romantic era, but that could be a wrong estimate.
Sometimes, this sort of salon or character piece will so plug in to a near-universal semiotic that the piece will have a great longevity; Liadov's
Music Box, being so evocative of a musical toy both of which the sound of it and a fascination with the mechanism itself is so deeply ingrained for so many around the world, semiotic to a degree where our recognition of it
seems innate, will probably be around, charm, and be 'relevant' until the general population no longer recalls the sound of a wind-up music box.
https://www.youtube.com/v/mzNjz4TmjCg
Haydn said that a composer should feel fortunate if their work stayed in circulation for up to about seventy years --
I think he was extremely canny (and not at all sentimental) in thinking a later third generation audience would not find that same music of interest, or as 'speaking to them.' (The irony of the source of the statement has not escaped me -- we still listen to Haydn two hundred and seven years after his death :-)Best regards.
Okay, Mr. Wiseguy Croche, please tell me what musical genre today fulfill the social function of making an extended family gather around making music together in the evening? What musical genre today fulfill the educational function of teaching kids playing the piano, or violin, or flute, or whatever instrument you wish, or singing?
Quote from: Florestan on September 24, 2016, 11:34:47 AM
Okay, Mr. Wiseguy Croche, please tell me what musical genre today fulfill the social function of making an extended family gather around making music together in the evening? What musical genre today fulfill the educational function of teaching kids playing the piano, or violin, or flute, or whatever instrument you wish, or singing?
Honestly man, is your general tone this demeaning, condescending, and disrespectful all the time or just on the internet?
Quote from: Florestan on September 24, 2016, 11:34:47 AM
Okay, Mr. Wiseguy Croche, please tell me what musical genre today fulfill the social function of making an extended family gather around making music together in the evening? What musical genre today fulfill the educational function of teaching kids playing the piano, or violin, or flute, or whatever instrument you wish, or singing?
The short answer: jazz. 8)
The semi-short answer: many universities offer jazz programs for students who are eligible. Jazz can be played on violin, flute, guitar, piano, saxophone, french horn, trumpet, trombone, clarinet, cello, etc. Sometimes jazz is even a large family affair (i. e. the Marsalis, Jones, Coltrane families) hence families gathering around making music together in the evening.
Quote from: Florestan on September 24, 2016, 11:34:47 AM
Okay, Mr. Wiseguy Croche, please tell me what musical genre today fulfill the social function of making an extended family gather around making music together in the evening? What musical genre today fulfill the educational function of teaching kids playing the piano, or violin, or flute, or whatever instrument you wish, or singing?
It sounds like you are deprived of some music education, or a willingness to bring this about of your own accord. :(
I'm not sure how obscure they are:
Jean Cras
Stéphan Elmas
Zygmunt Noskowski
Ludolf Nielsen
Asger Hamerik
Franz Xaver Scharwenka
Woldemar Bargiel
Josef Bohuslav Foerster
Cornelis Dopper
Eyvind Alnaes
If I'm taking "obscure" to mean not well-known to the average classical listener (but relatively well-known to people like us), then my list would be:
Atterberg
Braga Santos
Hanson (besides his relatively popular 2nd Symphony)
Martinu
Roussel
Arnold
Tubin
Casella
Ginastera
Rontgen
Szymanowski
Miaskovsky
Honegger
Martin
Bax
Bridge
Piston
Oops, that's more than 10... ::)