Your favorite composer born in 1685

[Karl Henning]

There must be considerable musical redundancy within the 555 sonatas.

Why?  And how could you claim such a thing, having listened only to 17 of them?  Perhaps there is considerable musical redundancy in the Bach cantatas, or in the Haydn symphonies: that would not nullify musical value which any listener finds in any one of them, right?

[ EDIT :: added italics ]

[Karl Henning]

Myself, even though I've got some twelve of the Pieter-Jan Belder series of the sonatas . . . I am probably going to fetch in the Ross set before very long.

[Opus106]

Myself, even though I've got some twelve of the Pieter-Jan Belder series of the sonatas . . . I am probably going to fetch in the Ross set before very long.

That's going too far if it's going to be a retaliatory purchase!

[71 dB]

Why?  And how could you claim such a thing, having listened only to 17 of them?

Because there is some redundancy already among those 17. It's statistically logical to assume the redundancy is larger among 555.

Perhaps there is considerable musical redundancy in the Bach cantatas, or in the Haydn symphonies: that would not nullify musical value which any listener finds in any one of them, right?[/font]

I seem to enjoy Bach's cantatas more than Scarlatti's sonatas or Haydn's symphonies. That's why I collect more Bach than Scarlatti or Haydn.

From your point of view I am doing everything wrong but it is my life.

[Karl Henning]

That's going too far if it's going to be retaliatory purchase!

Hah!

No, it's just love for the lit.  Fact is, I once pulled the trigger on Amazon for the complete Belder set (which was advertised briefly for an astonishingly decent price), but then before delivery I was told it was unavailable.  Yes, I was bummed!

[Karl Henning]

Because there is some redundancy already among those 17.

Oh, puh-leeze.  Say that those 17 are all you need, all you wish to hear, but spare me the pronouncement that there is reduncancy among those 17.  I think that Andjaparidze (I'm probably misspelling her name, no disrespect intended) would be a dull artist, if for a single disc of Scarlatti, she programmed redundancy in there.

So, Poju, setting aside the admittedly interesting question whether anything you do or say be right, I am afraid that in this matter, I must respect the pianist's opinion more highly than yours.

Sorry, lad!

[71 dB]

I am afraid that in this matter, I must respect the pianist's opinion more highly than yours.

Don't worry Karl, I can live with that.

This thread turned into absurd debate over how many sonatas by D. Scarlatti I should have. It is my money and my life. I hope this debate is over by now.

[Bulldog]

Oh, puh-leeze.  Say that those 17 are all you need, all you wish to hear, but spare me the pronouncement that there is reduncancy among those 17.  I think that Andjaparidze (I'm probably misspelling her name, no disrespect intended) would be a dull artist, if for a single disc of Scarlatti, she programmed redundancy in there.

Of course there's redundancy in those 17 sonatas: some are slow, some are of moderate tempo and some are fast.

[Bulldog]

Don't worry Karl, I can live with that.

This thread turned into absurd debate over how many sonatas by D. Scarlatti I should have. It is my money and my life. I hope this debate is over by now.

As far as I'm concerned, this thread has nothing to do with you, Karl or any nonsense about "should".  It's about three outstanding composers and the one each board member prefers.

As for the notion of redundancy, it's probably best not to make that claim without being familiar with at least most of the Scarlatti sonatas.
My opinion is that there is certainly sufficient variety of expression and form in his keyboard music.

[Bulldog]

The voting has closed; as expected, Bach easily took the top spot.  I was surprised with Scarlatti getting only two votes, as I thought that he was very highly regarded by board members. 

I do wonder how Scarlatti and Handel would fare with Bach out of the picture.  Perhaps another time.

[Karl Henning]

The voting has closed; as expected, Bach easily took the top spot.  I was surprised with Scarlatti getting only two votes, as I thought that he was very highly regarded by board members.

I regard him highly; I abstained from the vote. I'm statistically useless ; )

[Bulldog]

I regard him highly; I abstained from the vote. I'm statistically useless ; )

You're only useless if you decide to be so.

[Karl Henning]

Thank you!

[Josquin des Prez]

Because there is some redundancy already among those 17. It's statistically logical to assume the redundancy is larger among 555.

The redundancy is only superficial.