How many composers do you know anything of?

[MusicTurner]

(...)

Then you should devote to listening to their music much more time than you devote to writing about their music. It's as simple as that.

Telling forum members not to write here about music they like surely represents a new, though perhaps not so productive idea. And to my knowledge, this forum certainly hasn't been flooded with postings about Boccherini or Hasse.

I only know little of Hasse and find his story interesting, but recordings might tend to be HIP I suppose, and this can reduce their attractiveness for me, sadly. But the posts have certainly made me want to explore further.

[Mirror Image]

Yeah, something like asking a working girl how many customers she had. 

Neither do I. Probably somewhere between 100 and 200.

[Florestan]

Telling forum members not to write here about music they like surely represents a new, though perhaps not so productive idea.

You misunderstood me.

[71 dB]

You said it, so it's on you to explain. 

(Just kidding, man --- please, please, please don't start explaining it!)

I don't believe I even could if I wanted.  0:)

In my opinion and according to my taste Haydn was better than Mozart in some specific areas (symphonies, string quartets, masses) --- with the obvious caveat that he lived much longer than Mozart.

I struggle with Haydn's String Quartets and I can't say I know a Haydn Symphony that rivals my favorite Mozart Symphonies (39 and 41), However, I do think Die Schöpfung is an awesome oratorio and I do enjoy Haydn's Piano Trios and Concertos (I have always felt Concertos were the "big thing" genre of classicism in general).

[Florestan]

I don't believe I even could if I wanted.  0:)

I struggle with Haydn's String Quartets and I can't say I know a Haydn Symphony that rivals my favorite Mozart Symphonies (39 and 41), However, I do think Die Schöpfung is an awesome oratorio and I do enjoy Haydn's Piano Trios and Concertos (I have always felt Concertos were the "big thing" genre of classicism in general).

In my opinion and according to my taste Mozart is far superior to Haydn when it comes to concertos.

[71 dB]

In my opinion and according to my taste Mozart is far superior to Haydn when it comes to concertos.

I was comparing different genres within Haydn's output. In other words I enjoy Haydn's Cello Concertos for example more than his String Quartets. That said, I do enjoy Mozart's Concertos a lot too, probably even more (haven't given it a thought).

[Florestan]

I was comparing different genres within Haydn's output. In other words I enjoy Haydn's Cello Concertos for example more than his String Quartets.

For me it's the other way around. 

[71 dB]

For me it's the other way around. 

This very early Naxos was my first Haydn CD 20+ years ago and has remained one of my favorite Naxos discs.  0:)
It also introduced Boccherini to me as a bonus. 

[asin]B0000013JF[/asin]

[MusicTurner]

This very early Naxos was my first Haydn CD 20+ years ago and has remained one of my favorite Naxos discs.  0:)
It also introduced Boccherini to me as a bonus. 

[asin]B0000013JF[/asin]

I agree, it's a great disc, as far as I remember with some liberties in a cadenza or two (but I could be wrong regarding that).

[71 dB]

I agree, it's a great disc, as far as I remember with some liberties in a cadenza or two (but I could be wrong regarding that).

Candenzas for the Haydn Concertos are by the conductor Peter Breiner.

[MusicTurner]

Candenzas for the Haydn Concertos are by the conductor Peter Breiner.

There's another, interesting disc with Breiner, where he does jazzy cadenza in the Mozart Piano Concerto no.20, certainly worth hearing IMO. Both discs are well played, of course.

[Jo498]

I have no idea and no database or other easy method to guesstimate. 1000 seems a lot but I do have a lot of semi-obscure stuff including single works on anthologies (e.g. Erlebach, Schürmann, Schieferdecker on "Hamburg ouvertures"), so it must be several hundred. Still, when in this forum people make lists of their favorite American symphonists (or Soviet composers etc.) there is usually at least one name mentioned I have never heard of and many more I have never consciously heard any music of. So I have probably considerably less variety than many others.

[steve ridgway]

I used to have this kind of sentiment before coming to this forum (a few dozen maybe for me), but now I explore music because I feel inferior to people talking about composers I don't know. For example I would have never explored Atterberg otherwise. Maybe I should go back to the old sentiment 20 years ago and not care about what other people like, know and explore and instead explore my own things on my own terms? Especially when I am clearly not so much into 20th century Symphonic music as most people here seem to be. I seem to get more out of the music of Buxtehude's last pupil Johann Christian Schieferdecker than the Symphonies from 1945 or so people keep discussing here... 

Yes, explore what you really like, differentiate yourself as an individual. It's your own life story.

[some guy]

A revealing thread. If you're into that kind of thing.

It is amusing (to me) to think about a music site which required certain levels of knowledge for posting.

Not sure that would work very well in practice, but then what we have now (anyone who can type can post) does not work very well in practice. I've been in many conversations about music over the years, from long before the interwebs, and I've heard countless people who have very strong opinions about music say that they have very little experience with it.

It would be fun, I think, to be in a situation in which opinions correlate with experience, even if only just for a minute or two. But strength of opinion, here as in the wider world, is most assuredly NOT correlated with knowledge or experience or anything. It's self-substantiated.

Oh well.

I now know, however, why I like hearing from amw so much. 4500 does have some heft to it, no?