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

[Bonehelm]

You're drinking out of the toilet again, Poju.  My pointing out the fact that Mozart admired Haydn to a degree that he did not admire Dittersdorf, doesn't map onto your strawman du jour.

So when do you start those reading lessons, eh?

"You're drinking out of the toilet again"

Oh wow lol, never heard that expression before.

[max]

Well yes, but Ditters's opinion of Mozart is also very revealing - not only about how Mozart was perceived in his own time but about Ditters's quite significant limitations:

With Ditters by contrast, (and I was listening to some of his Ovid Symphonies this morning) a perfectly decent idea is repeated, then repeated, then varied maybe just slightly. But there's nothing to keep the listener's mind alert and active. It's all so symmetrical and predictable; there's never any element that surprises or astonishes. And since we've absorbed Mozart's more complicated, more difficult idiom plus much more that followed him, Ditters's music sounds simplistic and ultimately rather boring.

Strange how sensibilities differ! Having listened to Mozart and Haydn symphonies many times and I means ALL OF THEM many times, the Ovid symphonies of Dittersdorf I never found boring and definitely surprise in the way he ends some of his movements. All of a sudden an idea pops up that wasn't heard before!

Of course I wouldn't compare Dit to Mo & Hay but it's precisely because THEY are listened to so often that works of lesser talent - and so less listened to - can be equally stimulating at least for the time. That's certainly MY experience! The genre of the Classical Symphony encompasses much talent and near genius but as usual in any period THE GREATS are in the minority.

I wish I had more of Dittersdorf, Stamitz, especially the cello concertos of Carl Stamitz, and many more symphonies and concerti of J.C. Bach, etc. When one listen's to anything, it doesn't matter who wrote what, it's the sound that counts regardless of it's source.

I think if one want's to know in whatever age what a period sounds like it's necessary that one gives THE RULE a hearing as much as it's EXCEPTIONS because that too is fascinating and, in fact, creates the exception.

[Larry Rinkel]

Strange how sensibilities differ! Having listened to Mozart and Haydn symphonies many times and I means ALL OF THEM many times, the Ovid symphonies of Dittersdorf I never found boring and definitely surprise in the way he ends some of his movements. All of a sudden an idea pops up that wasn't heard before!

Of course I wouldn't compare Dit to Mo & Hay but it's precisely because THEY are listened to so often that works of lesser talent - and so less listened to - can be equally stimulating at least for the time. That's certainly MY experience! The genre of the Classical Symphony encompasses much talent and near genius but as usual in any period THE GREATS are in the minority.

I wish I had more of Dittersdorf, Stamitz, especially the cello concertos of Carl Stamitz, and many more symphonies and concerti of J.C. Bach, etc. When one listen's to anything, it doesn't matter who wrote what, it's the sound that counts regardless of it's source.

I think if one want's to know in whatever age what a period sounds like it's necessary that one gives THE RULE a hearing as much as it's EXCEPTIONS because that too is fascinating and, in fact, creates the exception.

An example of where I find Dit monotonous is the slow movement of the 3rd Ovid Symphony. He does have some affecting ideas, especially the cadential phrase. But once he decides on the texture for his accompaniment under the flute solo, it never varies. And the movement lacks any kind of real contrast.

But certainly one should immerse one's self in the whole of a period to get a feeling for it - not only because the lesser lights set off the greater ones, but because some of the supposedly lesser lights shine more brightly than one might have expected. As examples from the classic period: the wonderful D major symphony of Vorisek, some of the piano sonatas of Clementi, the symphonies of Mehul and JM Kraus, the operas of Spontini (Agnes von Hohenstaufen is a masterpiece), doubtless more.

[max]

An example of where I find Dit monotonous is the slow movement of the 3rd Ovid Symphony. He does have some affecting ideas, especially the cadential phrase. But once he decides on the texture for his accompaniment under the flute solo, it never varies. And the movement lacks any kind of real contrast.

But certainly one should immerse one's self in the whole of a period to get a feeling for it - not only because the lesser lights set off the greater ones, but because some of the supposedly lesser lights shine more brightly than one might have expected. As examples from the classic period: the wonderful D major symphony of Vorisek, some of the piano sonatas of Clementi, the symphonies of Mehul and JM Kraus, the operas of Spontini (Agnes von Hohenstaufen is a masterpiece), doubtless more.

Just listening to the 2nd slow movement of Dit’s 3rd symphony and I must admit it is somewhat soporific. Well! Thanks for pointing it out. Now I’ll know what to use instead of valium! Actually the whole symphony is boring but frankly I consider this as one of the exceptions in the series.

But there’s also the Four Ages of Man, the 1st Ovid symphony! It’s not Haydn’s 98th or Mozart’s 41st or 25th symphony but it is a work that I couldn’t possibly turn off once it’s on. I think the deal with Dittersdorf is he could be truly brilliant and also incredibly trite.

As for the other composers you mentioned, I know them, especially Mehul whom even Beethoven greatly respected. But I have to look into Vorisek, a new name for me! It’s amazing what some of these people accomplished and reflects our lack more than theirs if not recalled from oblivion.

[71 dB]

With Ditters by contrast, (and I was listening to some of his Ovid Symphonies this morning) a perfectly decent idea is repeated, then repeated, then varied maybe just slightly. But there's nothing to keep the listener's mind alert and active. It's all so symmetrical and predictable; there's never any element that surprises or astonishes. And since we've absorbed Mozart's more complicated, more difficult idiom plus much more that followed him, Ditters's music sounds simplistic and ultimately rather boring.

Yes, Dittersdorf is less surprising BUT music is much much more than just surprises. Surprises are overvalued. Surprises can be even annoying. I like music that goes as I predict because life is unpredictable (frightning). At least I have music that is predictable (safe and comforting). I don't need suprises in music because I meet plenty of them in my everyday life. Yesterday I went to a supermarket to buy The X-Files season 2 DVD set (lowered price) but surprise, surprise they did not have them. I had to come back empty handed and frustrated.

There is something VERY nice in Dittersdorf's music, it's some kind of "baroque echo". It has a pulse, a light version of baroque complexity.

[Catison]

Yes, Dittersdorf is less surprising BUT music is much much more than just surprises. Surprises are overvalued. Surprises can be even annoying. I like music that goes as I predict because life is unpredictable (frightning). At least I have music that is predictable (safe and comforting). I don't need suprises in music because I meet plenty of them in my everyday life. Yesterday I went to a supermarket to buy The X-Files season 2 DVD set (lowered price) but surprise, surprise they did not have them. I had to come back empty handed and frustrated.

There is something VERY nice in Dittersdorf's music, it's some kind of "baroque echo". It has a pulse, a light version of baroque complexity.

I'll let Larry answer for himself, but...he's not talking about whiz bang surprises.  He doesn't mean Haydn's 94 kind of surprises.  He is talking about little sophisticated changes that keep your interest.  No one is going to be knocked off their seat by this stuff, but it keeps them from falling asleep.

I find your statement above completely odd, given the composer you've decided to worship.  No other composer rambles as much as Elgar.  I have absolutely no idea where any Elgar composition is going next.  I feel him saying, "Ok, that was lovely, now lets get on with this other idea I had."  And the ideas don't feel related.  In a word, I'm constantly surprised about where he is taking the music.

So I don't get you at all.

[Mark]

I find your statement above completely odd, given the composer you've decided to worship.  No other composer rambles as much as Elgar.  I have absolutely no idea where any Elgar composition is going next.  I feel him saying, "Ok, that was lovely, now lets get on with this other idea I had."  And the ideas don't feel related.  In a word, I'm constantly surprised about where he is taking the music.

Extremely well put. I was baffled by that post.

Poju, you continue to 'surprise' me at every turn.

[karlhenning]

. . . With Ditters by contrast, (and I was listening to some of his Ovid Symphonies this morning) a perfectly decent idea is repeated, then repeated, then varied maybe just slightly. But there's nothing to keep the listener's mind alert and active. It's all so symmetrical and predictable; there's never any element that surprises or astonishes. And since we've absorbed Mozart's more complicated, more difficult idiom plus much more that followed him, Ditters's music sounds simplistic and ultimately rather boring.

Excellent and entirely to the point.

[johnQpublic]

Surprises are overvalued. Surprises can be even annoying.  

With that attitude, please promise me that you won't be one of my composition students.

[karlhenning]

"You're drinking out of the toilet again"

Oh wow lol, never heard that expression before.

I can't take credit for that; I copped it from the Firesign Theatre.

Surprises are overvalued. Surprises can be even annoying.

Now there is the statement of someone with a closed mind.

[karlhenning]

Now I'll know what to use instead of valium!

I knew we would find Dittersdorf his niche! 

[71 dB]

I find your statement above completely odd, given the composer you've decided to worship.  No other composer rambles as much as Elgar.  I have absolutely no idea where any Elgar composition is going next.  I feel him saying, "Ok, that was lovely, now lets get on with this other idea I had."  And the ideas don't feel related.  In a word, I'm constantly surprised about where he is taking the music.

To me Elgar's surprises are positive and afterwards seem extemely logical. When I listen to Elgar I am surprised but at the same time I have a "revelation" and I say to myself, "of course Elgar took this turn, it's a perfect one!" Elgar's "rambling" is one of the reasons why his music is always interesting, every note of it.

Elgar works on high level of sophistication and when you 'get' the multidimensionality you can anticipate what might happen next. For example, Elgar might put a theme played by oboe somewhere because it hasn't been heard for a while and the orchestral timbre has been such that hearing the sound of oboe is very pleasing (timbral dimension). You don't understand this dimension easily when you read the score but you enjoy it when you hear the music.

[karlhenning]

Well, there's the Babble of the Day.

[johnQpublic]

You don't understand this dimension easily when you read the score but you enjoy it when you hear the music.

BS

[BachQ]

Elgar's "rambling" is one of the reasons why his music is always interesting bloated and discursive, every note of it.

Ramble On, brotha ..........

[BachQ]

Elgar works on high level of sophistication and when you 'get' the multidimensionality you can anticipate what might happen next.

Testify, brotha ........... Keep hope alive ........

[karlhenning]

It's like Musicologists Manqués Meet Glue-Sniffers Convention. Poju is funnier than Leno.

[greg]

I'd settle for Greg changing his handle back to something that doesn't make me instinctively grimace every time I see it.

i'll try to think of something before long...

[BachQ]

Surprises are overvalued. Surprises can be even annoying.

Testify, brotha ........ I beg thee to testify!

[dirkronk]

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

Apropos of this, I found it interesting to hear my wife's comments the other day. We were driving to Austin and had either the San Antonio classical or the Austin UT station on, and someone started a Spohr clarinet concerto. My better half's response was something along the lines of: "How boring can you get?" I told her that Spohr was a contemporary of Beethoven, if hardly his equal in talent and her comeback was: "That's obvious." She likes a good bit of classical, even though she's not a serious fan, but when she doesn't care for something, she IS vocal about it. To me, it sounded like perfectly harmless upbeat music of its time period, the kind that a listening buddy of mine refers to as "tiddley-pom" music, but I had to admit that I didn't find that particular piece deep or inspired. Needless to say, we switched channels.


Dirk