The Great Mahler Debate

[Harry]

Well, I would not say I write it but I have made music with computer almost 15 years.
Andy was talking about my 2nd symphony (2003) which can be downloaded here.

Which I did some time ago, and forgot to tell you how much I liked it.

[71 dB]

Which I did some time ago, and forgot to tell you how much I liked it.

Not a problem Harry! It's not easy to give feedback in this kind off situation. I am proud of that symphony but hey, I haven't studied composing a bit and my knowlegde of music theory is limited to the rudiments. I just have music in my head and I do what I can and what sounds good to me.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Well, I would not say I write it but I have made music with computer almost 15 years.
Andy was talking about my 2nd symphony (2003) which can be downloaded here.

Sounds like a mixed between New Age, Copland, and Pettersson

[71 dB]

Sounds like a mixed between New Age, Copland, and Pettersson

Yes, I think some new age is there. Some parts may sound Coplandian. Pettersson's music I haven't heard unfortunately. 

[Haffner]

Sounds like a mixed between New Age, Copland, and Pettersson

I'd say there's definitely a compliment there, PerfectWagnerite !


71db has a very interesting, at times strikingly inventive, approach to orchestration. He often asserts instrumental colours with the kind of ingenuity that seems especially promising.

[mahlertitan]

I hope you have changed your opinion on mahler, atleast somewhat. I don't think i gave you his 8th symphony and Das Lied, those are his choral works and i think you should be familiarized with his instrumental works first.

Oh, btw do you know that mahler composed a little nice piano quartet for chamber instruments and piano?

[71 dB]

I'd say there's definitely a compliment there, PerfectWagnerite !


71db has a very interesting, at times strikingly inventive, approach to orchestration. He often asserts instrumental colours with the kind of ingenuity that seems especially promising.

I think that's because I haven't studied orchestration. I have a model in my head how orchestral sounds can be used and I make music accordingly. Computers can play anything you program them to do but I doubt a real orchestra could perform my music without huge problems.

Your words are most kind Andy! I never expected such feedback from anyone.

I hope you have changed your opinion on mahler, atleast somewhat. I don't think i gave you his 8th symphony and Das Lied, those are his choral works and i think you should be familiarized with his instrumental works first.

Oh, btw do you know that mahler composed a little nice piano quartet for chamber instruments and piano?

That's a work in progress MT! I will keep listening to the Mahler symphonies and I change my opinion if necessory. I have never think Mahler a bad composer, it's just that I don't see his music as unsurpassable as many do.

Mahler's Piano Quartet is interesting but unfortunately I have never heard it. I like chamber music with piano.

[knight66]

I have never think Mahler a bad composer, it's just that I don't see his music as unsurpassable as many do.

You are moving the goal posts. What people here have been calling you on is the absolute statements you made to the effect that Mahler's music is not very complex, Elgar's marches are more complex. Even if Mahler were a failed composer, it is evident and factual....his music is highly complex, certainly more so than what you compared it to. I am not sure anyone on the thread has claimed Mahler is unsurpassable, but a number of us have taken issue with the complexity comments....which you repeated.

Mike

[karlhenning]

Well, I would not say I write it but I have made music with computer almost 15 years.
Andy was talking about my 2nd symphony (2003) which can be downloaded here.

Thanks for the link, 71 dB.  Will listen later.

[greg]

You are moving the goal posts. What people here have been calling you on is the absolute statements you made to the effect that Mahler's music is not very complex, Elgar's marches are more complex. Even if Mahler were a failed composer, it is evident and factual....his music is highly complex, certainly more so than what you compared it to. I am not sure anyone on the thread has claimed Mahler is unsurpassable, but a number of us have taken issue with the complexity comments....which you repeated.

Mike

so what was it by Mahler he said wasn't complex?
i can see what he means, somewhat, with much of the 1st symphony, but besides that most of it is really complex, especially if you look at the score (or even if you pay attention to how many different lines are playing at the same time)

[knight66]

It is earlier in the thread. It would take me the same time to find it as it would for you to find it.

Mike

[greg]

he's talking about Mahler 3 
that guy needs to go buy another pack of q-tips

[PerfectWagnerite]

You are moving the goal posts. What people here have been calling you on is the absolute statements you made to the effect that Mahler's music is not very complex, Elgar's marches are more complex. Even if Mahler were a failed composer, it is evident and factual....his music is highly complex, certainly more so than what you compared it to. I am not sure anyone on the thread has claimed Mahler is unsurpassable, but a number of us have taken issue with the complexity comments....which you repeated.

Mike

I learn something new on this forum every single day.
Today I know at least one opinion that somehow an Elgar March is more complex than Mahler's 3rd symphony.

[71 dB]

Elgar's music is extremely complex, even his marches. The most complex 6 minutes of any given Mahler symphony may be more complex than a 6 minutes march by Elgar but the average complexity is lower. Mahler has long sections of really simple music while Elgar's marches are full of "action" from the beginning to the end. The average complexity of long works is low. Same with Elgar's oratorios. The most simple passages are simple but the most complex parts are "out of this world".

Never underestimate Elgar. He is an unbelievable composer. It's not a shame to be second to him!

Thanks for the link, 71 dB.  Will listen later.

Thank you Karl for your interest! 

[greg]

Elgar's music is extremely complex, even his marches. The most complex 6 minutes of any given Mahler symphony may be more complex than a 6 minutes march by Elgar but the average complexity is lower. Mahler has long sections of really simple music while Elgar's marches are full of "action" from the beginning to the end. The average complexity of long works is low. Same with Elgar's oratorios. The most simple passages are simple but the most complex parts are "out of this world".

Never underestimate Elgar. He is an unbelievable composer. It's not a shame to be second to him!

Thank you Karl for your interest! 

so you have both Mahler and Elgar scores to compare them?

[71 dB]

so you have both Mahler and Elgar scores to compare them?

I don't have any scores. A score is a projectional representation of the music and gives a simplified picture of Elgar's multidimensional music. I compare what I hear.

[greg]

I don't have any scores. A score is a projectional representation of the music and gives a simplified picture of Elgar's multidimensional music. I compare what I hear.

then you're talking about a completely different sense of complexity than what we're talking about

[mahlertitan]

I don't have any scores. A score is a projectional representation of the music and gives a simplified picture of Elgar's multidimensional music. I compare what I hear.

so you are saying you have a better way to analyze music than analyzing the score?

[knight66]

I am sorry, I ought not to have started this again....there is much to discuss without getting bogged down in the complex/not complex canard.

Mike

[71 dB]

so you are saying you have a better way to analyze music than analyzing the score?

Analyzing the score may tell irrelevant things while what is heard is always relevant.
A score with infinite complexity is worthless if it sounds bad.

Analysing a score must be clever as the number of notes per bar does not equal complexity. One has to see how much musical information is "coded" in to the score. One note for flute may seem simple but the change in the timbre, harmonic tension, rhythm, etc. may have tons of musical relevance if the composer is a genius.