5 Worst Composers Ever!!

[DavidW]

I think the other thread makes a good case that the soul of Mozart can be found in any genre.

Well I also think that those that find classical era music uninteresting are caught in the 19th century fetish of worshiping the lyrical melody above all else.  You would be lost in classical era music, and completely unengaged in baroque era music if you approach the music with that mind set.

[Tapkaara]

I think the other thread makes a good case that the soul of Mozart can be found in any genre.

Well I also think that those that find classical era music uninteresting are caught in the 19th century fetish of worshiping the lyrical melody above all else.  You would be lost in classical era music, and completely unengaged in baroque era music if you approach the music with that mind set.

I don't mean to start an argument with you David, but why is it you can make a statement like "19th century fetish of worshipping the lyrical melody" yet if one says that the music of the classical era is boring and emotionless, they are dead wrong? You are obviously someone who appreciates 18th century music quite a bit, perhaps more than any other period in music. I am not about to attack you for claiming that those who enjoy the sweeping grandeur of 19th century music are "fetishists," if you will. But if you can make a blanket statement about Romanticism, why is it that I am to be hunted down like a rabid dog for not being the biggest fan of 18th century music, Mozart included?

[Dana]

      In my experience, people who say that they don't like classical music have two things in common: they're only familiar with symphonic works, and they never heard it live. THe problem with the latter is obvious, but the symphonic one is a bit more difficult. Classical symphonic textures tend to be one of three options - strings, woodwinds, and tutti. This makes the work more boring for non-classical audiences - it all sounds the same (we'll get to how that relates to rap/hip-hop later ).
     The three genres mentioned above - chamber music, opera, and piano concerto - are different because there is a solo voice, and interaction. Not simply a solo line, or melody, but a single, continuing voice which guides us through the events that are happening - think of the way that Berlioz used the viola in Harold en Italie, for example. Many people have spoken (especially when dealing with a great performer) of how the solo line seems to speak directly to them, telling them that everything is going to be all right, or that it's time for action now, or even I love you.
     The same is true of chamber music, but on a different plane - here we can have conversations! All you need to hear is a good performance of a Haydn quartet (again, live) to figure this out. By the same token, though, that conversational energy is lost when transported to the orchestral setting (the only exception I've heard being Verklarte Nacht, but that's not a transcription so much as an orchestration) The point being, that generally speaking, chamber music, and mediums with solo voices, speak much more directly to people than natural orchestral music does.

[Gabriel]

I have found Mozart to be an exceptionally beautiful composer, but the fact of the matter is that he just didn't have the tools that the great romantics have to work with (the lower brass, the bigger wind section, expanded chromatic vocabulary, etc).

His tools weren't inferior, but different.

To the ears of many people, he's the poster-child of the classical era - a smooth, polished, uninteresting sound.

Unfortunately the power of stereotypes is very strong and can deform the appreciation of reality in a considerable way. When listening to many works written by C.P.E. Bach, Gluck, Méhul or Cherubini I feel transported very far away from a "smooth, polished, uninteresting sound". The Classical language is often much more complex than that.

[Tapkaara]

     In my experience, people who say that they don't like classical music have two things in common: they're only familiar with symphonic works, and they never heard it live. THe problem with the latter is obvious, but the symphonic one is a bit more difficult. Classical symphonic textures tend to be one of three options - strings, woodwinds, and tutti. This makes the work more boring for non-classical audiences - it all sounds the same (we'll get to how that relates to rap/hip-hop later ).
     The three genres mentioned above - chamber music, opera, and piano concerto - are different because there is a solo voice, and interaction. Not simply a solo line, or melody, but a single, continuing voice which guides us through the events that are happening - think of the way that Berlioz used the viola in Harold en Italie, for example. Many people have spoken (especially when dealing with a great performer) of how the solo line seems to speak directly to them, telling them that everything is going to be all right, or that it's time for action now, or even I love you.
     The same is true of chamber music, but on a different plane - here we can have conversations! All you need to hear is a good performance of a Haydn quartet (again, live) to figure this out. By the same token, though, that conversational energy is lost when transported to the orchestral setting (the only exception I've heard being Verklarte Nacht, but that's not a transcription so much as an orchestration) The point being, that generally speaking, chamber music, and mediums with solo voices, speak much more directly to people than natural orchestral music does.

I think a lot of that makes sense. And I agree with the strings, woodwind, tutti statment. To my humble ears, the limited textures of the classical period become very monochrome after a while. That is why I like Baroque music: there is simply more texture and more interesting things going on in just about every bar.

I've heard myriad Mozart piano concerti and, while they may hold more excitement than a symphony (at least for me), I again find them hard to get into. They are witty and cheeky and raucously ribald and all that, but I still find myself returning to other piano concerti like like Khachaturian's or Prokofiev's when I want something I can really get into.

While I am no huge fan of Haydn per se, I will admit I find his musical thinking to be more profound, and I like his melodies better. Just my opinion

[DavidW]

I don't think I understand what you mean by the voice in this context Dana.  The piano in a piano concerto is not continuously playing nor is any single person in an opera, not one instrument in a chamber work continuously plays either.  You must not be talking about a single instrument or singer, it must be something else.  Not a melody or a bass line either since you explicitly ruled them out.  Would you mind elaborating on what you mean by a continuous voice?

[Dana]

      Well maybe the soloist doesn't doesn't play all the time, but he does get his hands on all of the material and works it over, doesn't he? When the development takes place in sonata-form, isn't the piano usually right in the middle of things? And opera singers also have two huge advantages over instrumentalists  - they have a tangible motive (love, hate, revenge), and a face to express it with (which, incidentally, one cannot see while listening to a CD). A lead character in an opera (depending upon the opera) has the opportunity to create a complete, and complex character with as many whims or passions as you or I, and they're often given recits or arias to express them. How could an 8-bar solo-line in a symphony possibly compete with that?

[DavidW]

Okay I didn't misread you then.

The contest between well voiced parts and colorful texturing (i.e. small vs large ensembles) is not unique to classical era music.  It sounds more like a distaste for chamber orchestra sized pieces.  Not an intimate dialog as compared to chamber pieces, not as colorful and as textured as large symphony orchestra pieces.  I would think that anyone with that problem, would also suffer it on other eras as well.  But the point is seen.

[Dana]

It sounds more like a distaste for chamber orchestra sized pieces.  Not an intimate dialog as compared to chamber pieces, not as colorful and as textured as large symphony orchestra pieces.  I would think that anyone with that problem, would also suffer it on other eras as well.  But the point is seen.

      I once read a study that found that some people hear music more in terms of orchestration than in harmony or melody. Meaning that if you have a trumpet and a flute playing playing a major and a minor scale, some people won't notice the difference in tonality so much as the fact that first it's a trumpet playing, and then there's a flute playing. Now compare that orchestrational difference with that between a classical orchestra with a modern rock band and see how ignorant so many people are of the great subtleties capable in Mozart's music. That could further explain many people's general distaste for orchestral music.

[DavidW]

And combine that with people not used to listening for long melodies, and being so used to common time, we have a sad conclusion that much of the subtlety of any form of classical music is lost on the average person.  If they are not used to listening to classical music, they probably only "hear" or notice short melodies, and the effectiveness of these fragments for being beautiful is the only thing they have to judge the quality of the music by.

I am talking about the average joe, and not the romantically inclined listener (since I was previously discussing the latter, I wanted to make clear the switch).

[ChamberNut]

I'd like to know how Mozart's humanity manifests itself in his music, and, why is this even more pronounced in his piano concerti?

That's just what I feel and hear when I listen to Mozart Piano Concerti, and particularly in the slow movements.  Especially in the slow movements!  There is nothing mathematical or mechanical in that music whatsoever.  I was nearly moved to tears by the PC# 9 K.271 Andantino movement last night.

Have another listen to a random Piano Concerto slow movement.

It's most probably just me, but I feel Mozart put just a tad more extra into his Piano Concertos, than into anything else.  From what I have read on Mozart, I think he felt particular pride in his PCs.

[vandermolen]

Ah...when in doubt, start some trouble!

1) Philip Glass
2) Terry Riley
3)
4) anyone influenced by Richard Strauss (Strauss waltzes incl. by default)
5) H. Gorecki (Sym No.3 and Harpsichord Cto. notwithstanding)

There...I feel better now...and you?

I'd go along with Richard Strauss (although I respect the fact that others here rate him highly)

I can't really appreciate Nicholas Maw's music

York Bowen has been a big disappointment after reading enthusiastic reviews

Stockhausen/Boulez/Berio

Gottschalk

These are really composers whose music I don't like - not necessarily 'worst composers ever'

[Bulldog]

I'd go along with Richard Strauss (although I respect the fact that others here rate him highly)

I can't really appreciate Nicholas Maw's music

York Bowen has been a big disappointment after reading enthusiastic reviews

Stockhausen/Boulez/Berio

Gottschalk

These are really composers whose music I don't like - not necessarily 'worst composers ever'

Sorry to read that you don't like Gottschalk's music - it best reflects the early American experience.

[Franco]

Luciano Berio has a pretty varied catalog of work.  Some is atonal, but some is not like that at all.  I suggest you to check the Folk Songs (on this CD) before you write Berio off all together.

[Tapkaara]

I'd go along with Richard Strauss (although I respect the fact that others here rate him highly)

I can't really appreciate Nicholas Maw's music

York Bowen has been a big disappointment after reading enthusiastic reviews

Stockhausen/Boulez/Berio

Gottschalk

These are really composers whose music I don't like - not necessarily 'worst composers ever'

How DARE you soil the name of Strauss with your vile post! I will ignore that you said he is one of your least favorites (as opposed to one of the worst) and I will consider your opinion bizarre and outrageous!!!! 

Actually, I, until recently, thought kind of the same thing but I've been getting closer to his music.

Haven't heard of Bowen though...

[karlhenning]

It's not like he said he couldn't stand Richard Strauss 

[snyprrr]

Are you kidding me? i GO AWAY FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS, AND WE'RE UP TO 7 pages (sorry caps)

And I was going to apologize for my last post, but now it appears you all are well beyond that!

Looking forward to catching up.

btw- I was listening to Spohr and Ditters, and I will NOT put them on the list!!!

All pHILIP gLASS, ALL THE TIME!

)what is UP with these caps???)

[ChamberNut]

)what is UP with these caps???)

Maybe you need the tablet form instead of the CAPSule form for your meds...... 

[Elgarian]

     I once read a study that found that some people hear music more in terms of orchestration than in harmony or melody. Meaning that if you have a trumpet and a flute playing playing a major and a minor scale, some people won't notice the difference in tonality so much as the fact that first it's a trumpet playing, and then there's a flute playing. Now compare that orchestrational difference with that between a classical orchestra with a modern rock band and see how ignorant so many people are of the great subtleties capable in Mozart's music. That could further explain many people's general distaste for orchestral music.

This rings true for me, and I'd like to extend discussion of the whole idea; it wouldn't surprise me in the least to discover that many of our musical responses are dictated to a large degree by physiological and/or psychological factors largely beyond our control; I think the playing field isn't level. I know, for example, that my poor musical memory is unlikely to improve no matter what I do; it's no better now than it was 30 years ago, and I think it explains why I find it intensely difficult, even impossible, to unravel what's going on with a composer like Mahler. I just drown helplessly in it. By contrast I find listening to Handel, say, incredibly easy. That's not to say I appreciate all the complexities therein; I don't, by any means. But there's some type of musical pattern there that happens to suit the way my brain works particularly well and gets me off to a good start every time.

I think what I'm suggesting is that criticising someone who has tried, but who simply cannot enjoy Mozart, may not be appropriate. It may be the equivalent of deriding a one-legged person for being unable to run.

[Ten thumbs]

There is one characteristic of bad composers that has been neglected - their music is anonymous, they  have no recognizable idiosyncrasies. Therefore it is unlikely that you know whose music you are listening to.