Can people tell

[dylanesque]

Hi All,
Sorry for asking another newbie question ,I guess it all boils down to Mahler. Firstly I must state I'm only familiar with Bach , Mozart , Beethoven , Schubert , Chopin , Schumann , Rachmaninoff and recently Mahler ( not all ). Now only reason I tried Mahler was because I noticed the forum seemed to wax lyrical and praise his work. I started my Mahler voyage with Symphony 4 as recommended by Sarge on the forum after trying in vain to like symphony 5. I really loved the Symphony and then went for 2 Boulez which is amazing competing for Eroica in my fav symphony so far. Anyway I then decided to buy the complete Mahler Cycle and downloaded it for the ridiculously cheap price of 15.99 ( pounds) Amazon.I listened to Symphony 1 ,2,4 and 9 and Das lied so far. I then watched Mahler the odd Arty film directed by Ken Russell.The thing that struck me when watching the film apart from having a 70s feel and trippin on LSD was that although their was alot of music and Mahler Symphonies I had not heard was that I instantly could tell that they sounded only like Mahler.
I realise Mahler's music is all about him but I wondered is their anyone except him that is so distinctly them that its instantly recognisably them in symphonies. For example in Beethoven's wonderful symphonies I love them all but they could in my opinion be separate composers in each as they don't sound so personal ?
Ha hope the thread makes kinda sense.
Kind Regards
Darren

[jochanaan]

The greater and (to some extent) more recent a composer, the more distinctive and personal his/her style.  I think that, if there were an unknown Beethoven symphony and I heard it for the first time, I would instantly recognize it as Beethoven's.  (But maybe that's a little unfair; I've known and loved all his Nine for almost four decades now.)

Other composers whose style is especially distinctive:
Chopin, in the piano music (his few compositions with orchestra are somewhat less distinctive except for the piano parts)
Wagner
Bruckner
Tchaikovsky
Leos Janacek
Debussy
Rachmaninov
Stravinsky
Webern
Gershwin
Prokofiev
Shostakovich
Alan Hovhaness
Elliott Carter
Henryk Gorecki

[Mirror Image]

Listen to some Delius and clear your mind of everything you know about classical music. Nobody sounds like him nor will they ever. There is such a honest, beautiful, pure quality in his music that's not superficial or ego-driven, it's just smoldering Romantic ecstasy.

[Brian]

Recognizing a composer's style is a skill that takes practice, but it can be done. A few years ago, I heard a piece on the radio (Beethoven's First Symphony, I think) and mistakenly thought it was Mozart! But on the other hand, a few months ago I turned on the radio, and after five minutes commented, "This sounds a lot like Tchaikovsky." And sure enough, it was one of the very few Tchaikovsky pieces for orchestra that I had not yet heard.

For most of the great composers, it's achievable, and gets easier the later you get. For example, separating Copland from Shostakovich is a lot easier than telling Mozart from Haydn. For not at all famous composers, of course, it's much harder; I could never tell you the difference between Herzogenberg and Raff, for example!

[jochanaan]

...A few years ago, I heard a piece on the radio (Beethoven's First Symphony, I think) and mistakenly thought it was Mozart!

You can be forgiven for that.  Beethoven hadn't really found his voice yet for the First.  (Although I think it sounds more like Haydn than Mozart.  And that's not an insult!  I love Haydn's music, especially the later symphonies and other late works.)

Something I find often is that composers' later works are more distinctive than their earlier ones.  By no means always!  Mahler's music is distinctive from the very first (although it has been speculated that his lost student works were not nearly so distinctive).  Perhaps one of the most extreme examples of "progressive distinctiveness" is Janacek.  If he had stopped composing ten years before his death, we may never have heard of him, or only as a footnote.  Almost all his reputation rests on the extraordinary set of masterpieces he wrote in his last ten years.  Carl Nielsen is another composer whose later music is progressively more distinctive and masterful than his earlier work.

[dylanesque]

The greater and (to some extent) more recent a composer, the more distinctive and personal his/her style.  I think that, if there were an unknown Beethoven symphony and I heard it for the first time, I would instantly recognize it as Beethoven's.  (But maybe that's a little unfair; I've known and loved all his Nine for almost four decades now.)

Other composers whose style is especially distinctive:
Chopin, in the piano music (his few compositions with orchestra are somewhat less distinctive except for the piano parts)
Wagner
Bruckner
Tchaikovsky
Leos Janacek
Debussy
Rachmaninov
Stravinsky
Webern
Gershwin
Prokofiev
Shostakovich
Alan Hovhaness
Elliott Carter
Henryk Gorecki

Good post and interesting about Beethoven. I find Schubert symphonies similar to Beethoven so say if they both released a belated composition do you think you would know which was which ?

[dylanesque]

Recognizing a composer's style is a skill that takes practice, but it can be done. A few years ago, I heard a piece on the radio (Beethoven's First Symphony, I think) and mistakenly thought it was Mozart! But on the other hand, a few months ago I turned on the radio, and after five minutes commented, "This sounds a lot like Tchaikovsky." And sure enough, it was one of the very few Tchaikovsky pieces for orchestra that I had not yet heard.

For most of the great composers, it's achievable, and gets easier the later you get. For example, separating Copland from Shostakovich is a lot easier than telling Mozart from Haydn. For not at all famous composers, of course, it's much harder; I could never tell you the difference between Herzogenberg and Raff, for example!

With you on Beethoven 1st and 2nd quite similar to Mozart. Also find Haydn in both of them

[dylanesque]

Listen to some Delius and clear your mind of everything you know about classical music. Nobody sounds like him nor will they ever. There is such a honest, beautiful, pure quality in his music that's not superficial or ego-driven, it's just smoldering Romantic ecstasy.

Cheers I shall give Delius a spin soon:)

[71 dB]

Listen to some Delius.

Based on what I have heard by Delius (Brigg Fair, In a Summer Garden) Delius seems to be a "British Debussy". Am I far off?

[Karl Henning]

Based on what I have heard by Delius (Brigg Fair, In a Summer Garden) Delius seems to be a "British Debussy". Am I far off?

Much less interesting than Debussy, IMO. There's no way Delius and Stravinsky would have played the four-hands version of Le sacre together, for instance : )

[The new erato]

Much less interesting than Debussy, IMO.

Indeed.

[Mirror Image]

Based on what I have heard by Delius (Brigg Fair, In a Summer Garden) Delius seems to be a "British Debussy". Am I far off?

Yes, you're pretty far off, contrary to what the naysayers here have said (and continue to say) he's nothing like Debussy at all. The fact that he incorporates African-American, Norwegian, French, German, and English influences into a unique synthesis makes him much more interesting to my ears than Debussy whose music I love a lot. His innovative music hasn't been acknowledged by historians because of the political climate these composers worked in and what has continued to happen in this environment since their death. The fact that the naysayers don't acknowledge what he has done and achieved in music shows the general ignorance of not only historians/scholars, but classical listeners as well.

But, let me say, that Delius is a hard-sell because he remains somewhat of a controversial figure in classical music. The man was a true visionary, but I fully respect, and can understand, why people wouldn't warm up to his music right away or perhaps even never.

P.S. Here's a quote from myself regarding some of Delius' innovations:

Some of Delius' innovations in music:

1. Used the first wordless chorus --- (1897's Koanga which predates Debussy's Nocturnes by two years)
2. Wrote the first African-American opera, Koanga (1887 -- predates Gershwin's Porgy & Bess by thirty something years)
3. Used blues and Negro spiritual music in a classical context (Florida Suite, 1887) for the first time, which again predates Gershwin
4. Used American folksongs (Yankie Doodle) and other marching band tunes and collided these together creating an unheard kind of dissonance which predated Charles Ives (American Rhapsody 1896 later reworked as Appalachia)

[Florestan]

There's no way Delius and Stravinsky would have played the four-hands version of Le sacre together, for instance[/font] : )

Sure, just like there's no way Tchaikovsky and Brahms would have played the four-hands version of Brahms's Third together. And sure again, it proves nothing at all. 

On topic: off the top of my head, the symphonies of Tchaikovsky and Mahler and the chamber music (solo piano included) of Schubert are instantly recognizable after some time spent on listening to their music.

[jochanaan]

Good post and interesting about Beethoven. I find Schubert symphonies similar to Beethoven so say if they both released a belated composition do you think you would know which was which ?

Oh yes.  Schubert's symphonies are less dramatic, less tightly constructed, and more lyrical.

[Beale]

I started my Mahler voyage with Symphony 4 as recommended by Sarge on the forum after trying in vain to like symphony 5.

Perhaps this recent podcast (http://www.abc.net.au/classic/program/keystomusic/listen-again.htm) could help you to get a better grasp of Symphony 5. It is only available for a very limited time.

[dylanesque]

Perhaps this recent podcast (http://www.abc.net.au/classic/program/keystomusic/listen-again.htm) could help you to get a better grasp of Symphony 5. It is only available for a very limited time.

Many thanks ill listen to it .

[Lisanti]

This has been percolating around in my brain since I saw this thread. I think that  exposure to works by many different composers coupled with exposure to many works by the same composer  teaches you to differentiate, and I think that a whole lot of the learning takes place at a sub-conscious level of your brain.

That is, for me, anyway, at some level I hear the work as a whole, and it is subconsciously categorized as "Bach", "Beethoven", "Rossini", or whomever; even though every Bach piece is different from every other Bach piece, there is some degree of commonality among them, and that sub-conscious level of my brain can sit up and say, "Oh, that's Bach, or maybe Handel, when he sounds like Bach".But you don't memorize every note of every work and run it through a  mental database when you hear a new work.

Personal explanation: after Hurricane Sandy,we lost power for 10 days, during which time we had a battery-operated radio. I couldn't take the all-news stations,so we switched to WQXR, the NYC-based classical station, and have had it on just about non-stop ever since, and in that time, I have noticed that my ability to identify the composers of music that is new to me has improved immeasureably, and I believe that  hearing thousands of different works by hundreds of different composers has greatly increased the size of that subconscious knowledge of music.

I read over this and I'm not sure how much sense it makes, but I can't see any other way to say it. Basically, listen to lots of music by lots of composers and let your brain figure it out for you.

[Karl Henning]

Wow, QXR is still operating, and still playing classical? Excellent!  So many pieces I love, I first heard on WQXR, e.g. the Berg Kammerkonzert for piano, violin & 13 winds : )

[dylanesque]

This has been percolating around in my brain since I saw this thread. I think that  exposure to works by many different composers coupled with exposure to many works by the same composer  teaches you to differentiate, and I think that a whole lot of the learning takes place at a sub-conscious level of your brain.

That is, for me, anyway, at some level I hear the work as a whole, and it is subconsciously categorized as "Bach", "Beethoven", "Rossini", or whomever; even though every Bach piece is different from every other Bach piece, there is some degree of commonality among them, and that sub-conscious level of my brain can sit up and say, "Oh, that's Bach, or maybe Handel, when he sounds like Bach".But you don't memorize every note of every work and run it through a  mental database when you hear a new work.

Personal explanation: after Hurricane Sandy,we lost power for 10 days, during which time we had a battery-operated radio. I couldn't take the all-news stations,so we switched to WQXR, the NYC-based classical station, and have had it on just about non-stop ever since, and in that time, I have noticed that my ability to identify the composers of music that is new to me has improved immeasureably, and I believe that  hearing thousands of different works by hundreds of different composers has greatly increased the size of that subconscious knowledge of music.

I read over this and I'm not sure how much sense it makes, but I can't see any other way to say it. Basically, listen to lots of music by lots of composers and let your brain figure it out for you.

I think you have made some good points. I have noticed since listening alot more to classical music I have an idea if its likely to be Bach / Handel even if I have never heard the piece. When listening to Brahms fourth Symphony I can hear alot of Bach and Beethoven influence in his music but for me their is not so much his personality stamped in the work. With Mahler I can hear alot of Wagneresque music but it seems absolutely self centred and Mahler totally.I do need to listen to more composers I agree then it may all click.

[Lisanti]

Wow, QXR is still operating, and still playing classical? Excellent!  So many pieces I love, I first heard on WQXR, e.g. the Berg Kammerkonzert for piano, violin & 13 winds : )

Not only is it still on, it is now a listener-supported station, and is available online. I was going to mention this somewhere here, because starting on Wednesday March 21, they are going to have 10 days of only Bach, during which they are going to play every single thing he wrote, and it will be available online. Check www.wqxr.org for the details.