How much of your listening is guided by other GMG members?

[Larry Rinkel]

Maybe if Dittersdorf, Vanhal, Hofmann and Benda had composed anything even remotely in league with the first three...

Why bring up such a foolish objection? Are you not aware, all unknown composers are undeservedly neglected, and all well-known composers overrated and overplayed?

[karlhenning]

Wow, when you put it like that, Larry, it does seem an attractive proposition to a free-thinker such as I . . . .

[71 dB]

Maybe if Dittersdorf, Vanhal, Hofmann and Benda had composed anything even remotely in league with the first three...

How do you know they have not? I have never said those composer are as great or greater than Haydn, Beethoven and Mozart. I am saying they are nearly as good. Active neglect of those fine composers is plain stupid and a sign of bad attitude. You could say you don't have time/energy to explore Dittersdorf (very acceptable and understandable) but saying he is not worth exploring isn't intelligent.

[karlhenning]

How do you know they have not?

Partly because, as you so sensibly agree, you could never say that those composers are as great as Haydn, Beethoven or Mozart.  You could say that you enjoy the music of Dittersdorf (very acceptable and understandable) but saying he is nearly as good as these great composers isn't intelligent.

[Gurn Blanston]

Partly because, as you so sensibly agree, you could never say that those composers are as great as Haydn, Beethoven or Mozart.  You could say that you enjoy the music of Dittersdorf (very acceptable and understandable) but saying he is nearly as good as these great composers isn't intelligent.

All true, Dr. Karl. However, not a valid reason to totally dismiss them. I can easily say that I enjoy listening to them, without any implication that they are challengers to H-M-B. They don't have to be to be worth listening to.

[karlhenning]

All true, Dr. Karl. However, not a valid reason to totally dismiss them. I can easily say that I enjoy listening to them, without any implication that they are challengers to H-M-B. They don't have to be to be worth listening to.

Excellent point well taken, Sieur de Gurn.

Hearing Poju constantly whingeing about (say) Dittersdorf being "nearly as good" as (say) Mozart, though, is surely a valid reason for being disinclined to bother with Dittersdorf, especially when coupled with Poju's legendary "deaf spot" for the great Mozart operas.

[71 dB]

Partly because, as you so sensibly agree, you could never say that those composers are as great as Haydn, Beethoven or Mozart.  You could say that you enjoy the music of Dittersdorf (very acceptable and understandable) but saying he is nearly as good as these great composers isn't intelligent.

I have learned it's useless to argue with you. Perhaps we should totally neglect Bax, Janacek, Turina, Borodin, Telemann, etc. because they were not as great as Mozart? Maybe we should listen to Haydn, Beethoven and Mozart only because others were inferior? Enjoying Dittersdorf if pervert because history does not recognise him as well as Mozart. What the fuck? Dittersdorf WAS one of the most important composers of his time! He just was not an amazing genius like Mozart. He was just really really good. You are entitled to not listen to his music but I am sick of being bashed for liking him. Why don't you people let me enjoy his music too?

If you think history writing is always 100 % right you are idiots.

[karlhenning]

When Mark is listening to the Rakhmaninov Vespers, it always inclines me to listen again, too.

[karlhenning]

I have learned it's useless to argue with you.

Well, then you have actually learnt something useful from your blather about "vibrational fields." Rejoice, therefore!

[71 dB]

especially when coupled with Poju's legendary "deaf spot" for the great Mozart operas.

I am just talented and clever enough to recognise the "commercial compromises" in Mozart operas. He wrote them to earn money. Nothing wrong with that. Everybody is entitled to use their talents to get rich. People were entertained. That doesn't mean the music was really great. It was popular music of it's time. Mozart showed his musical ambitious elsewhere.

[Mark]

When Mark is listening to the Rakhmaninov Vespers, it always inclines me to listen again, too.

[longears]

I've yet to find a GMGer who would be willing to sing Purcell duets with me.

Muriel--one of my colleagues just sang Aeneas in a local production with a period orchestra.  Come for a visit, bring something yummy, and I'll hook you up with him!

[longears]

I have learned it's useless to argue with you. Perhaps we should totally neglect Bax, Janacek, Turina, Borodin, Telemann, etc. because they were not as great as Mozart? Maybe we should listen to Haydn, Beethoven and Mozart only because others were inferior? Enjoying Dittersdorf if pervert because history does not recognise him as well as Mozart. What the fuck? Dittersdorf WAS one of the most important composers of his time! He just was not an amazing genius like Mozart. He was just really really good. You are entitled to not listen to his music but I am sick of being bashed for liking him. Why don't you people let me enjoy his music too?

If you think history writing is always 100 % right you are idiots.

Someone needs a hug!

Congrats, dB, you're beginning to glimpse the point.  Bax, Janacek, etc were not as great as Mozart by any objective standard generally recognized.  However, that has nothing to do with any particular listener's enjoyment of same.  I happen to like all three, and there are certainly times when I would prefer Bax to Mozart--and vice versa.  However, even if I preferred Bax 99% of the time, I doubt I would be so grandiose as to claim Bax as the greater composer simply because of my idiosyncratic preference.

Your error is that you chronically regard your preference for Elgar as an indicator of his absolute superiority.  This is both ludicrous and arrogant, and it's your offensive arrogance in championing your hero that leaves a very sour taste in others' mouths.  It is horribly off-putting.  I see from some of the posts above that I'm not the only one here who no longer enjoys listening to Elgar because of the unpleasant associations with you that his name now conjures.

As for listening guided by others here:  I answered some--which, of course, encompasses all the other choices.     Seriously, many contributors here have broadened my musical tastes and appreciation.  For instance, the Panocha Quartet's Dvorák is delightful and something I might never have happened on without the recommendations of several posters here.  Thank you!

[karlhenning]

Poju's thought here is further fettered by his cartoonly black-and-white notion that we have to choose between either Bax being "nearly as good" as, who knows, Beethoven, or, (*gasp!!*) total neglect of Bax!  The horror!

There is this important difference, too:  total neglect of Beethoven amounts to a type of cultural illiteracy, which it were completely ridiculous to claim in the case of total neglect of Bax.

[greg]

hahaha what a funny discussion

[Gurn Blanston]

Excellent point well taken, Sieur de Gurn.

Hearing Poju constantly whingeing about (say) Dittersdorf being "nearly as good" as (say) Mozart, though, is surely a valid reason for being disinclined to bother with Dittersdorf, especially when coupled with Poju's legendary "deaf spot" for the great Mozart operas.

Without doubt. I am only grateful in this instance that he isn't into really obscure composers, else I would have to turn to something entirely different. Like show tunes of the '30's...

[Sergeant Rock]

Recently, my listening has been fairly well 'directed' by the listening habits of other GMG members. One advantage of having a larger-than-average CD collection (as Sarge well knows ) is that such guided listening is much more possible - a good argument, at least, for rampant consumerism.

I'd say that some of my listening, in times other than the past fortnight or so, is guided in this way. And very pleased I am about this: it leads to all kinds of re-evaluations of discs bought long ago and which I never thought I'd get around to hearing again any time soon.

How about you?

Guided isn't the right word in my case. Inspired, maybe. I'm often inspired to play music that is being currently discussed in the forum (and my collection is large enough that I can often reach for the exact performance too)...and I sometimes buy recordings based on members' rave reviews or even negative reviews (what someone cannnot tolerate might be right up my alley). I've been in this game so long now (forty years serious collecting) I don't need anyone's advice...but, I have appreciated the guidance I've gotten from our Baroque Vocal experts; and I do own recordings now that I might have overlooked had someone not mentioned them in this forum.

Sarge

[71 dB]

Your error is that you chronically regard your preference for Elgar as an indicator of his absolute superiority.  This is both ludicrous and arrogant, and it's your offensive arrogance in championing your hero that leaves a very sour taste in others' mouths.  It is horribly off-putting.  I see from some of the posts above that I'm not the only one here who no longer enjoys listening to Elgar because of the unpleasant associations with you that his name now conjures.

Why is it an error? Who says nobody can be greater than Mozart or Beethoven? In fact Elgarians feel in their hearts Elgar is the composer whose greatness seems unbeatable.

If musicians and scholars think Mozart or Beethoven is the greatest their objective methods of evaluation are simply finetuned to favor classic era. Neutral methods would give Elgar much greater status as his music really features stunning sophistication.

[Catison]

Why is it an error? Who says nobody can be greater than Mozart or Beethoven? In fact Elgarians feel in their hearts Elgar is the composer whose greatness seems unbeatable.

If musicians and scholars think Mozart or Beethoven is the greatest their objective methods of evaluation are simply finetuned to favor classic era. Neutral methods would give Elgar much greater status as his music really features stunning sophistication.

Interesting that you're the only one who knows the objective opinion, and it just happens to be yours.

[karlhenning]

Neutral methods would give Elgar much greater status as his music really features stunning sophistication.

Thanks for the laugh!