5 Worst Composers Ever!!

[Florestan]

I'd like to know if there are other people who believe that, without an appreciation for Mozart or Schönberg, one lacks breadth in classical music. Is this really true?

It depends on what is meant by "breadth". If it's meant to have listened to each and every composer, or most of them, that ever put pen to paper, starting with, say Hildegard von Bingen and ending with, say Karl Henning --- then anyone here, without exception, lacks it. 

That being said, we all know that beauty can't be forced down anyone's throat ears. Liking or not liking a certain composer is a matter of temperament, taste and even age. I personally didn't interpret Tapkaara's original post as implying Mozart is really one of the worst, but just one whose music Tapkaara likes the least. Actually, he qualified and ammended his statement several times. I don't quite understand what's the purpose of hunting him down and crucifying him, nor do I understand what difference does it make to Mozart's status if this or that person dislikes him. 

[Tapkaara]

It depends on what is meant by "breadth". If it's meant to have listened to each and every composer, or most of them, that ever put pen to paper, starting with, say Hildegard von Bingen and ending with, say Karl Henning --- then anyone here, without exception, lacks it. 

That being said, we all know that beauty can't be forced down anyone's throat ears. Liking or not liking a certain composer is a matter of temperament, taste and even age. I personally didn't interpret Tapkaara's original post as implying Mozart is really one of the worst, but just one whose music Tapkaara likes the least. Actually, he qualified and ammended his statement several times. I don't quite understand what's the purpose of hunting him down and crucifying him, nor do I understand what difference does it make to Mozart's status if this or that person dislikes him. 

I appreciate your comments!

In a potentially contentious thread such as this, we are all bound to read things we don't want to read. It's no secret I love Sibelius. If someone in this thread listed Sibelius as one of the worst (or one of the composers they liked least), I might be frustrated or confused, but I would never personally attack anyone or call into question the "breadth" of their knowledge.

I really get irked that, in forums, one is crucified, as you put it, for expressing an opinion that may not be popular. (I guess I should expect this!) I mentioned in an earlier post that Mozart is a sacred cow. I think this is very true. It seems that anything negative said about him is the same as killing your grandmother or kissing Satan's derriere. In other words, it just vile or disgusting. If I can accept and respect that many people HATE Philip Glass (a composer I like a lot), than I think others should respect the fact that I am one of the tiny few that doesn't worship Mozart. I does not make me a bad person, nor a philistine, just someone whose tastes are a little different from the norm.

That should be celebrated in a forum where exchanges of ideas are the reason that were here. The moment we discourage others to express certain opinions, even if they may be unpopular, is the moment a forum is rendered useless.

OK, I'm done with my dramatic monologue. Again, Florestan, thank you for your insight.

[karlhenning]

      One might argue on an absolute artistic level that music cannot be judged on a "good vs. bad" scale. Value is very much in the eye of the beholder (although not entirely).

Partly that.

Partly, too, the fact that most every composer most all of the time does his work with the intent of writing well;  and in most cases, there is some portion of audience which thinks well of it.  I think there is certainly value in the discussion of great-vs.-good (in which there is still the component of Is the listener attuned to the composer under advisement?) . . . but "bad music" (overall) is not bad in any way equal-but-opposite to the ways in which great music is good.

[karlhenning]

I really get irked that, in forums, one is crucified, as you put it, for expressing an opinion that may not be popular. (I guess I should expect this!)

Right;  don't let it irk you!  In most cases, it is not personal;  and (a) a lot of people of not going to agree with any opinion/preference which I may express at any time, plus (b) this is a very active forum.

Plus (c) a lot of off-the-cuff commentary on an Internet forum is . . . worthless 

[Florestan]

most every composer most all of the time does his work with the intent of writing well;  and in most cases, there is some portion of audience which thinks well of it. 

Word. Even Dittersdorf qualifies. 

[karlhenning]

 0:)

[Ten thumbs]

The worst composers will all have been forgotten. With the possible exception of Nanes mentioned above none of them will have any of their works recorded. Thank goodness!
I once knew someone who declared that Mozart's music never went anywhere. He didn't like it. To me, that music has arrived from the very first note but music is always a matter of taste. Some do not like Mahler, others Wagner, etc.

[Dana]

Plus (c) a lot of off-the-cuff commentary on an Internet forum is . . . worthless 

[DavidW]

It depends on what is meant by "breadth". If it's meant to have listened to each and every composer, or most of them, that ever put pen to paper, starting with, say Hildegard von Bingen and ending with, say Karl Henning --- then anyone here, without exception, lacks it.

That was never my point, I listed all of those composers to demonstrate what it really means to rank someone as bottom of the barrel.  I doubt that anyone if they listened to only 10% of that list would still rank Mozart so very low.

Actually, he qualified and ammended his statement several times. I don't quite understand what's the purpose of hunting him down and crucifying him, nor do I understand what difference does it make to Mozart's status if this or that person dislikes him. 

I was not hunting him down, I was not crucifying him.  And this is not about Mozart's status (nor is he a sacred cow, any kind of intelligent criticism and not "I hate it" would be considered).  This is about calling to task a poster for creating a strange list.  If he has no intention of defending or even explaining his bizarre tastes, then why bother posting in the first place?

I am certainly in the right for demanding an explanation for him, and I have not crossed a border into libel.  I shouldn't have to defend myself.

[Franco]

That was never my point, I listed all of those composers to demonstrate what it really means to rank someone as bottom of the barrel.  I doubt that anyone if they listened to only 10% of that list would still rank Mozart so very low.

I was not hunting him down, I was not crucifying him.  And this is not about Mozart's status (nor is he a sacred cow, any kind of intelligent criticism and not "I hate it" would be considered).  This is about calling to task a poster for creating a strange list.  If he has no intention of defending or even explaining his bizarre tastes, then why bother posting in the first place?

I am certainly in the right for demanding an explanation for him, and I have not crossed a border into libel.  I shouldn't have to defend myself.

I suppose not, but then again, I can't help but wonder, why do you care so deeply about what his choices are?  For sure, I agree with you that listing Mozart on a "worst of" list is odd, and I did comment on his choices by remarking that his choices were 180 degrees opposite from my own, hence I can rely on his opinions are reliable information, in an inverse ratio to my tastes.

But to get into such a long winded analysis of what went into his choices .... a bit much, IMO.

Sometimes I think we take these threads way too seriously, and the forum loses a certain amount of charm in the process.

[karlhenning]

That was never my point, I listed all of those composers to demonstrate what it really means to rank someone as bottom of the barrel.  I doubt that anyone if they listened to only 10% of that list would still rank Mozart so very low.

The idea that Mozart is somehow one of the 5 Worst Composers Ever is bizarre in the extreme.

Someone has probably pointed that out already;  but it is such a deliberate eccentricity, repetition is justified: The idea that Mozart is somehow one of the 5 Worst Composers Ever is bizarre in the extreme.

[Harpo]

4) anyone influenced by Richard Strauss (Strauss waltzes incl. by default)

I don't think Richard Strauss was related to the Johans, or did I misunderstand you  

In choral music, I like the English composer John Rutter, but many "serious" singers think he's too commercial, akin to John Williams. So if Rutter is enjoyable, can he still be called "bad"? I agree with the person who said that the really really bad composers disappeared into oblivion; they wouldn't have even been on Karl's list. 

[Lethevich]

Otto Klemperer
Leif Segerstam
Lorin Maazel
Wilhelm Furtwängler
Bruno Walter

[Tapkaara]

AGAIN, to clarify. I NEVER said Mozart was one of the 5 worst composers. I said he was in my 5 LEAST FAVORITE. Isn't there a difference? (Refer to my first post in this thread, PLEASE!!!)

Had I known this was going to be such a hassle to explain myself, I would never have made the post to begin with.

[ChamberNut]

Again, I'll repeat that this thread was a bad idea to begin with anyways.  There is no possible way to objectively come up with 5 worst composers.

So, putting that aside, it's really all about your 5 least favorite composers, is it not?  So whether it's Mozart, Dittersdorff, Brahms, Cage, it's irrelevant anyways.

I don't think anyone should have to defend a list of 5 favorite composers or 5 worst?

[ChamberNut]

The idea that Mozart is somehow one of the 5 Worst Composers Ever is bizarre in the extreme.

Someone has probably pointed that out already;  but it is such a deliberate eccentricity, repetition is justified: The idea that Mozart is somehow one of the 5 Worst Composers Ever is bizarre in the extreme.

Doesn't matter Karl.  You cannot say Mozart is in the 5 worst composers, or 5 greatest composers.  You just can't.  You can however say that Mozart is one of your 5 favorite composers, of 5 least liked composers.  Period.

[Dr. Dread]

Or that Mozart is a composer that starts with "M".   

[ChamberNut]

Or that Mozart is a composer that starts with "M".   

  Yes, that is an objective statement.  QFT.

[Franco]

Doesn't matter Karl.  You cannot say Mozart is in the 5 worst composers, or 5 greatest composers.  You just can't.  You can however say that Mozart is one of your 5 favorite composers, of 5 least liked composers.  Period.

Is is easier to recognize bad writing: incorrect grammar; plodding prose; superficial ideas; mistakes in logic, etc.  But the point is that there is such a thing as good writing and bad writing.  Ask any high school English teacher.

I think the same holds true for music.

Mozart was clearly a master craftsman and one who expressed sublime musical thinking.  He excelled in several genres of musical style, dramatic as well as abstract instrumental writing.  I think it is safe to say that he was head and shoulders above all but a handful of his contemporaries in skill and gifts, and no doubt his musical gifts transcend his own era and tower above most composers throughout the successive periods.

I think one can say that objectively speaking Mozart was not only a good composer but one of the greatest who has ever lived.

If someone wishes to claim that Mozart's music is not to his taste - it is his right - but to propose that there are no objective standards for rating musical composition is very wrong, IMO.

[Florestan]

That was never my point, I listed all of those composers to demonstrate what it really means to rank someone as bottom of the barrel.  I doubt that anyone if they listened to only 10% of that list would still rank Mozart so very low.

I agree. But as far as I understood his position, Tapkaara wrote something to the effect that, of all composers whose music he has heard, Mozart is among the 5 least favorite. I see nothing bizarre or idiotic in this. I'm sure we all can write down a list of composers whose music we have heard, and pick 5 most often listened to and 5 least often listened to, i.e. 5 favorites and 5 least favorites. Of course, such a classification means nothing outside the reference frame, which is highly individual and personal in each case.

In my case, of all the (famous, to narrow the focus) composers whose music I have heard, the ones that I listen the least are Bruckner, Wagner and Mahler. This doesn't imply at all they are bad composers : it's just that I don't feel the need to hear their music as often and with as much pleasure as, say, Schubert, Brahms or Chopin.

I think that's what Tapkaara wanted to say in the case of Mozart. Maybe it's  perhaps the unfortunately worded "holy cow" part that upset you, but the essence of his position as decoded above I don't find objectionable in the least.

PS: I am an ardent Mozartean!