Three Composers We Could Live Without
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 พ.ค. 2023
- Perhaps the evil god of classical music Cancrizans, instead of eliminating all but one typical work per composer, would let us get rid of three non-essential names entirely and keep all the rest. Here's my selection, and I can't wait to see yours. Just remember: at least one of your three has to come from the meat and potatoes "classical" period--say, 1650-1900. The rest is up to you, but they should all be names that matter (somehow, to someone).
- เพลง
![พรากรัก - เต้ย อภิวัฒน์ [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ShT2ltn8GBE/mqdefault.jpg)
I totally agree about Wuorinen. I’ll never forget being at a rehearsal at Texas Tech University many years ago when he was preparing the orchestra to perform a work he would guest conduct that evening. In the middle of total cacophony and chaos, he suddenly stopped the group and let loose a sneering scream at a trombone player, “E natural, not E flat!!” You could feel it across the room-the unspoken response, “Like it . . . matters?”
Before or since, I've never encountered such vicious negation of both people and beauty. Ugly, Stupid, Contemptuous. An arrogant impostor. A fool who dressed himself in a polyester king's costume in order to get away with berating dukes and knights.
Train wreck of a composer. Train wreck of a person.
I was producing a recording with Wuorinan conducting good own Bass Trombone Concerto. At one point, he stopped the ensemble and sais 'No expression, please.' That rather says it all!
I hesitate to name any composers I could live without, because in the past I would have written off several composers I later came to appreciate (C.P.E. Bach, for example). An interesting follow-up theme would be "Three Composers I USED to Think We Could Live Without".
Thank you for mentioning C.P.E. I am still at the stage where I do not appreciate him (I keep imagining an awkward scene in which he disparages "the Old Man" for being "old fashioned" and thinking he could do better) but I hope to eventually give him more credit. After all, he had very big shoes to fill. I like your idea about "3 Composers I USED to..."Georg Philipp Telemann, I used to roll my eyes, I'm now a huge fan. Another is Henry Purcell. All they used to play was "When I am Laid..." - and I am not a fan of lugubrious arias. But having heard more of his theater music: King Arthur, The Fairie Queen, The Married Beau, Abdelazar, etc. he's now one of my absolute favorites. Finally C.M. von Weber, who could rock a Silesian rhythm in such arias as in Kommt ein schlanker Bursch gegangen from "Der Freischütz". More to him than meets the ear.
Simply love CPE! A great, great composer!🎉
Sometimes what you dislike can tell a lot more about you than what you like. Liking everything is akin to not liking anything. Criticizing other works often demands more objective explanation compared to blind praising which often lacks this objectivity. It takes a lot of guts to do this I'm assuming so hats off to you.
I should also mention I have a Boulez CD. I only play it when guests have stayed over too long and need to go home.
I think Boulez would have understood what you were doing. He said of his own music that he usually needed aspirin afterwards.
Lol that had me falling off my chair! But seriously, the 2nd Piano Sonata is a great work, and a pianist like Pollini does it true justice. The other two piano sonatas are also among the greats in the repertoire.
When Boulez died, all I could think of was the fact that when Schoenberg died, Boulez (aged 26) wrote a blistering essay entitled "Schoenberg is dead" writing off all of his music, in a thinly veiled attempt to promote himself, which evidently worked quite well. I think Schoenberg has stood the test of time better than Boulez.
Schoenberg is eternal. 😀
Certainly. Schoenberg's work will never be mainstream fare, but it definitely has secure canonical status by now. I don't think Boulez is really listened to or studied today apart from specialists.
@@barrymoore4470 I just blasted Répons in my truck while I drove to work (not in music at all) in central Texas, lol ... we exist!
@@roberthamilton542 I was at the world premiere of Repons as it happens, and I remember it quite vividly, and indeed enjoyed it at the time. I'm curious to know now how many times it's been performed
@barrymoore4470 That's exactly what they said about Schoenberg. Of course, "they" could be right in Boulez's case. But I don't listen for the judgment of posterity. I listen because I like it and in the long run we're all dead so why waste time waiting?
I find it quite difficult to dismiss a composer. First, because I have not heard everything by that individual. Second, and more important, my taste has changed over time, and so I do not want to give up on anyone. As the years have passed, I have liked some composers more and more and others less and less.
Right? This thread is INCREDIBLY condescending.
AGREED... many times a work "grew" on me over time. I was even indifferent to the Tchaikovsky 5th Symphony at first, a fact that still amazes me. Ya gotta keep looking.
@bachback Don't be so hard on yourself! You sure don't need to listen to some toiler's entire musical oeuvre just to confirm they're only of interest to pedants and
I think you need to develop your sense of humor. That’s one of the greatest things about Dave Hurwitz. He has a sense of humor.
I love your take-no-prisoners approach to thinning the herd, Dave! 🎶 Over the centuries, the great god of HYPE has championed "miserable" and "wretched" music of many stripes, indeed! 😁
@7:14...Yes, I really needed to have my morning tea come out of the nostrils. Thanks Dave! X-D
I was dubious, but from the moment you mentioned Wuorinen I was eating out of your hand.
Thank you. You know Desert Island Disks. Perhaps this episode could be rebranded as "Music you would take to hell with you."
Rather than banishing this composer or that, for the sake of efficiency, I wonder if we might select a note, say Ab, and ban its further use?
You can have Ab as long as I can keep G#. 😊
As a trombonist I really hate F#/Gb. In the lower registers it’s in 5th position which is in the middle of nowhere, and the high F# is in sharp 3rd which isn’t even a real position. What is that? Just get rid of it.
Droll, very droll...
C is the ketchup of the music world. Once the glorious foundation of Brahms’ 1st and Glen Campbell’s Rhinestone Cowboy now a ubiquitous and decadent old key overused for the sake of a quick emotional fix.
I blame Bach. He couldn’t leave well enough alone.
You have a very mischievous streak...to say the least! 😀
This is why folks are afraid of "classical music." The fear of liking a work an "expert" dismisses as trash and being embarrassed for liking that work.
No one should ever be afraid of liking trssh or worry about expert opinions. That was the point of this video.
You did it again.
Dave, I have to say that I'm disappointed. I find the premise of this topic mean-spirited. I think of this from a composer's perspective. I compose music, and while I admit that I'm a relative novice and I'm always working to improve my craft, the thought that a composer and his/her work are best forgotten really hits me hard...especially since my name and popularity are not even of a fraction of the status of those who are posed here. Where does that leave me? Shall I just give up and go away? Although I feel every note and passage I compose, am I best forgotten? If I died and every musical thought I've ever had died with me, would it matter to anyone? Even though I know the answers to these questions, not all of us are accomplished enough to have our names in the record stores or in the newspapers or magazines and that realization is painful enough.
I wish I could say I feel sorry for you, but I don't. If you want to compose, then compose from your heart, do what you can to get performed, and leave the rest to posterity. That's how this works. If you don't want to be judged, go do something else. I know this sound harsh, and I'm sorry for that--I really am--but if the need for self-expression and the act of fulfilling that need aren't enough for you, then you need to be in another business. Enjoy yourself and can the pity party. No one will be coming. With that said, I wish you lots of luck and every success.
I feel sorry for people who don’t have a sense of humor
But there is so much horrible music out there. Country I could do without. Rap. Rock. Punk. Bluegrass. And yes, classical. If it was easy, everybody would be awesome.
It's still a noble effort. Maybe one day the AI's will sift through all the long-forgotten music and elevate some of it back into public consciousness. Nobody can predict the aesthetics of the future.
You’re hilarious Dave! Thank you so much for your reviews
Anyone remember Richard Nanes? Amateur pianist and composer who issued oodles of CDs on his own label and then sent them to all the radio stations he could. Output is divided between tonal wallpaper and chromatic sludge.
Now THERE'S a good candidate for obscurity!
I don't consider the music of Nanes to be inane.
@@HassoBenSoba: I think your wish has already been granted. 😎🎹
Yes. Nanes managed to push a surprising number of his CDs into the collection of my local public radio station. As much as I loved to explore new composers, I found everything of his utterly unlikeable.
Out of curiosity I bought one of his CD's years ago. Suffice it to say it was rather forgetting stuff. What I want to know is how he got the London Symphony Orchestra with Thomas Sanderling to actually record a couple of his symphonies. Was Nanes like Bernard Herrmann, wealthy enough to hire an orchestra to record his stuff? Herrmann's stuff for the most part is quite interesting at least and excellent at best. Nanes? Inane is probably the best adjective for it.
I like how Dave is playing the long game with Cancrizans, identifying his capricious and mutable nature and getting him to see reason. Keep on Him. That said, we all love and worship you, Cancrizans, and know you will do the right thing in the end. (I can butter him up, too.)
Sounds like a technique first adopted by Scheherezade...^^
I could live without Riccardo Broschi, Carl Czerny and Philip Glass.
I couldn't live without Bach, Beethoven and Messiaen.
@antero Avila: by the transitive property, living without Czerny pretty much means living without Beethoven. And Liszt. And Schumann. And Chopin. And…
@@sevenlayer8780 1. Beethoven came before Czerny
2. Liszt and Chopin were prodigies before they met Czerny.
@@thekeyoflifepiano Great artists weren't grown in a vacuum. There are numerous prodigies in every generation so much so that Beethoven tired of being introduced to them. Prodigies have to be nurtured and Czerny nurtured Liszt.
I agree that putting Czerny in the same sentence as the others is a bit of a stretch. But I don't dig his compositions.
Lose Glass and you might lose Nyman, and anyone who costs me MGV is getting the collected works of Ingmar Carlsson in quad.
I have heard a couple of Wuorinen pieces that were downright likable (which always comes as a shock). And I basically agree that at its best Boulez is just shimmery atonal Debussy, but that’s kind of nice. The intellectual posturing and bullying that went along with it is more problematic than the music itself. But I wouldn’t be heartbroken to lose either.
There’s no shortage of second tier baroque composers to delete. I particularly dislike the ones that are structurally flabby, and would probably get rid of Froberger or something, Or moving into the classical period, I can do without Dittersdorff even though he’s perfectly competent.
If Cancrizans has a hunger for sheer volume of music deleted, it’s tempting to offer up Leif Segerstam, as the evil god gets to eliminate over 300 symphonies in one go.
I don't really know his music (nor am I qualified to judge it), but my impression of Boulez is that the problem is not so much his posturing (that's very common), but his sincerity. He was, in the opinion of many musicians, a man of great talent, but he seems to me to have been more interested in his perplexing (but sincere, as far as I can tell) intellectual philosophies than in music. I remember that he disliked Poulenc because it was "not progress". What a strange concept, to dislike music based on its date. I'd like to know progress towards what and how do we know when we arrive. I get the feeling that he didn't know either.
As someone who really likes Poulenc, either the piano works or the Gloria, or - having LOVED playing the piano for my flute playing daughter, the wind sonatas - that's a good reason to shelve Boulez.@@koalabandit9166
At first this topic sounded like fun, but after reading the comments it is more frightening. And wasn't the game actually to give the reason, why you could live without a given composer and not just dropping names?
Yep. But as I said, the general response is interesting, even after I delete a good chuck of it.
What have you done David? Even Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms, Mahler, Schubert and Bruckner have been proposed by some participants here. This is literally apocalyptic. I suppose by tomorrow Chopin, Debussy and Ravel will also pop up. By the end of the week only Froberger and Solage will have survived.
Well, it's an interesting sociological study, isn't it? I outlined very clear criteria for what I wanted to do, and what I got was a pretty much inane and thoughtless hate-fest. Why am I not surprised?
@@DavesClassicalGuide Well put.
@@kingconcerto5860 LOL
It's a great exersise !
Of the big names-I mean, the really BIG names-Chopin and Debussy are the first two I would suggest. (However, I will admitted that this isn't reasonable. To abide more seriously by the rules of the game, I'll suggest two tedious moderns, John Tavener and Arvo Pärt; and for the obligatory old-timer, one of the relative-no-one-cares-about composers: either Louis Couperin or Alessandro Scarlatti. Probably Couperin to be honest.)
Le marteau sans maitre.. I can live without it.
OMG, I have several discs of Fasch and enjoy his music. I most certainly agree with the other two you picked.
Whether you like it or not isn't the point!
I periodically go back to Boulez's music thinking that the problem must be all mine for not trying hard enough with it. Initially I always find myself thinking, 'This is such interesting stuff, I really ought to make more effort'. And then by around 10 minutes in, my attention is starting to wander in a big way... Much though I love Walton, I could do without the official bombast like Crown Imperial. The absolute pits has to be Karl Jenkins, though. I once sang in a choir that was going to do a cantata by him. I lasted half way through a rehearsal before deciding that it was unspeakable crap and walking out.
I agree. And I add a reflection. It's a fact that Karl Jenkins has almost symbolically destroyed the great, noble figure of "British conservative composer". I doubt in calling him "composer", but we can try... His music, of course, is incredibly awful, that's obvious, a continuum of 90sclassical-pop cliches or something like that. Well, despite these thing, we can try and call him "composer", and there're lots like him, so... OK: "composers". But the commercial "success" of this music is even more incomprehensible than the music itself (in fact, EMI recorded and diffunded a lot of this stuff before his dissolution). By the way (reflection two), the general (musical) aesthetic of His Majesty King Charles III (awful) Coronation Ceremonies and Shows showed some subliminal influence of the type of "aesthetic ideal" (laughs, too solemn) that Jenkins music exemplarices: homogenous bad taste, sentimentality at his worst, technical disasters almsot everywere, and so on. Sad for England. Anyway, Jenkins will be rapiddly forgotten, thankfully. And the noble title of "British conservative composer" will survive.
So you decided to junk Jenkins, eh?
@@lautarovazquez7205 You sound like a pillar of the musical establishment that likes to deride Jenkins or a lot of other music that many people actually like and enjoy. So what would you have put in the Coronation celebrations then? Boulez? Tippett? Maxwell Davies? All merrily on their way to oblivion apart from a tiny group of aficionados, along with many other "classical" composers of the last 100 years. Someone summed it up beautifully as "squeaks and farts" music.
Heard the Karl Jenkins "L'Homme Armee" Mass live in late April, and, prepared to dislike it (having previously played Jenkins' dubious "Palladio", aka the bad diamond commercial background soundtrack) was instead well and truly impressed. The end of the Sanctus was particularly epic. So even composers of dreck can generate the occasional diamond...
I like Crown Imperial...it is sort of a 6th or 7th Pomp and Circumstance March (all of which I truly love!)
Happy to read "Cancrizans" and understand what Dave was referring to. Greetings from Argentina!
If you ever plan on going back to the old format and can only choose one work by Ligeti, I think it should be either Atmospheres or the Chamber Concerto. Atmospheres really is his breakout work and where he took the leap away from the serialized direction of music and decided to work with sounds directly. His micropolyphonic textures aren’t quite as refined at this stage, but the core essence is there. It reflects almost every criticism he has of serialism; that it’s a roundabout way to deal with working with sound, especially when the compositional goal does not match the intent of the serialist process. Atmospheres also brought in other facets of composition at the time such as taking a massive amount of inspiration from compositional techniques in electronic music.
The chamber concerto is another potential good one because it really is a culmination of all of his work up to that point. He uses Net structures and maximally smooth harmonic and rhythmic additive processes from Ramifications. His micropolyphonic textures are slowed down and refined to be more melodic, but still retain that core element of goal orientation and gradual, almost imperceptible evolution of the soundscape. He uses quasi canonic structures such as in Lux Aeterna or Lontano to organize and regulate his micropolyphonic textures. Even that Pattern-Meccanico of the third movement can be seen as an outgrowth of his experiments in Poeme Symphonique, which is also seen in his second string quartet. This piece is part of his continuous explorations of how to create a new sense of musical syntax all over again for his musical age. There are so many things in here that make it a culmination of his work and make it worthy to be the one spared by the great god of classical music
About 1979, with the Two Part Symphony, Wuorinen turned some sort of intangible corner and his music became very interesting to me. I don't care for his operas, but there are many pieces of his that I often return to and would not like to lose: Five, New York Notes, The Golden Dance, Trio for Bass Instruments, Genesis, Mass, Trombone Trio, Microsymphony, etc. So I can't write him off as you can. The guy I CAN write off is Elliott Carter -- I've never been able to get anything out of his music, with the exception of the very early tonal ballets. And I've tried countless times.
Like you I`ve tried time and time again with no success. I admire him such that he lived a very long time and still had works in the pipeline, but it sure was not MY pipeline.
I really like his first string quartet and absolutely nothing else I’ve heard of his.
I adore Carter, own nearly all of his works (I love the Concerto for Orchestra, the Symphonia and the Double Concerto in particular) and dislike most American serialists (Babbitt and Wourinen) intensely - one thing one learns very deeply when you work in music for decades is that musical taste is as diverse, weird and variable as music itself is. There are listeners and fans of just about every tiny erudite corner of the musical world. I rate the 14th century composer Solage incredibly highly and there are perhaps a handful of us in the world. The numbers don't matter - they don't affect my love of the work at all. I would like it the same if 10 million people loved it or if only 10 did. The good thing about the popularity of popular music is that it means I don't have to care whether or not anyone likes Puccini or Tchaikovsky (I don't at all - the music sounds to me like Carter probably does to you, "senseless screeching" is what goes through my head when I hear their work).
Carter wrote a rather nice early Symphony that I heard Orpheus play live....sounded as good as Copland of the time.
@@daviddavenport9350 I have the two early ballets, POCAHONTAS and THE MINOTAUR, and they have much the same sound as you describe. He didn't have the melodic gift Copland did, though.
Wuorinen and Boulez sure, I will go with that. Fasch however has written two works that I come back to from time to time, namely the lute concerto in d minor (FWV L:d1) and a sonata for four strings (FWV N:d3), also in d minor. The lute concerto is fun to listen to and even more fun to play. It has a W. F. Bach vibe to it with some italian influences. Give those a listen too, before giving them the final axe…
Again, what you like isn't the point at all.
I rather like Fasch, myself. He wasn’t on a par with Bach and Handel, or even Telemann, but his music is pleasant enough that I wouldn’t want to delete him. Actually, I can’t think of a single Baroque composer I’d be willing to delete. The earliest composer I’d want to delete is Clementi. His music was very popular in its time, but is really quite dull. I know he isn’t Baroque; he’s Classical. But couldn’t we let it slide?
Dear Dave, what is your opinion about the Concerto for guitar and orchestra op 72 by Bacarisse? I think it is a splendid party record.
I'm curious about which classical Era composers you could do without? I just enjoy the variety of not hearing only the top tier but also the emulators who often have original things to say.
This is a very funny video. I have a list of composers we could do without, but it keeps changing, so I'll restrain myself. But it's an interesting exercise just to think about it. Thanks.
If there was one composer I'd be happy never to listen to again (besides Boulez) it would have to be Sorabji. This lone figure produced vast piano compositions which are truly unlistenable. I tried once and had to lie down in a dark room for several hours to recover.
I'm one of the weirdos who loves Sorabji, but would never make anyone else listen to him if they didn't like him. You've got to sort of be into that stuff. I don't mind Wuoronin either.
Wow this topic really opened up the floodgates. I wonder if any other comments section has filled up so quickly!
In a way, I have sympathy with the commenters who wish to be civil, perspicacious, and discreet. In another, much more visceral way, I couldn't have been happier for this list to start with Charles Wuorinen. I'll add John Eaton and Bernard Rands.
Yeah Rands sucks
Reminds me of a Tovey essay where he mentions a Viennese Whos Who journal circa1825 There were l think abour 7 Schuberts included but none of them were .the Franz we know and love today
I’m always ready to be contrary - but I can’t disagree here. They’d none of them be missed.
Carter, Telemann, and Boulez. If the local classical station plays any more Tafelmusik, I’ll have to break the radio. Carter: I’ve tried to get his music and never succeeded. Boulez I can’t added anything to what you said.
I come across both known and obscure composers from all periods with whose works I am unfamiliar. I do them the courtesy of listening to a representative sampling and deciding if I want to hear more. There are a great many I find of no consequence, but I still wouldn't wish them to be expunged. After all, someone else might enjoy them. But, in the spirit of fun, I have listened to all 3 of these, and can't fault your selections.
Listen to the magnificent Overture/Suite in BFlat for double orchestra by Fasch (try the recording by the Virtuosi Saxoniae) and see if you might reconsider your conclusion. LR
I join the Stammpede.
@@HassoBenSoba I've heard it, and a few others. Pleasant listening, very much of its era, but nothing that makes me want to hear more.
@@leestamm3187 Listen to Fasch's lute concerto (more often recorded with guitar).
I was very fond of Wuorinen's "Time's Enconium" when I was a teenager. Haven't listened to it in many years, but I suspect it isn't without merit.
Yes. This was a piece of the moment. The synthesized simplicity was mesmerizing. I may be wrong.
Eventually, I put my lp of Time's Encomium in boiling water and moulded it into a usable flower pot (already a hole for drainage). True story - I'd bought it aged 14 on the back of a Gramophone recommendation.
It won the Pulitzer prize so it's hard to dismiss him for that alone.
And Donald Martino won a few years later. Funny in retrospect though not at the time. I expect Cancrizans would smile, and then banish the entire school of American career academic serialists to their own private planet.
@@mikereiss4216 Respectfully disagree-Pulitzer committee can certainly get things wrong, any such collective body can.
The vast majority of composers who have lived languish in obscurity. Some are discovered by musicians who discover some quality in the music. If others also apprehend that quality over time, the music endures. The opinion of Old Father Time is the only one worth taking notice of.
That's a somewhat over-romantic view, I think, because it suggests that a) musical quality is an objective and b) will inevitably be recognized. Both are debatable at the very least. There are tons of great musical pieces languishing in neglect, while Old Father Time's judgment has certainly beeen influenced by marketing, education, and a host of other things.
Havergal Brian, Michael Finnissy, Hans Pfitzner
The donkey by the ears mate Thank for respecting your critical faculties and putting them above mere fashion and fads Couldnt agree with you more
My personal favorite for oblivion has to be Thea Musgrave. In 1977, her Voice of Ariadne premiered at NY City Opera to jeers, catcalls, and thrown programs. The performance stopped.
Does this mean that the Voice of Ariadne was consigned to a grave of muskrats?
Very interesting, I didn't know that. I'm fond of her Mary, Queen of Scots and Christmas Carol. Never heard Ariadne.
Harold Shonberg’s review for the NU Times is unfavorable to Ariadne but he doesn’t mention anything like catcalls. In fact, he says there were cheers at the end. I don’t care for her work and would agree we could do without it. I also could live easily without Florence Price, whose work I find exceedingly tedious but who is played a lot on the classical Sirius XM channel, and Charles Stanford.
Thea Musgrave is still alive. She turns 95 today.
@@Tolstoy111 Wow, so she's still doing the Muskrat Ramble?
My three: Nepomuk Hummel, Morton Feldman and Boulez.
An interesting exercise Dave thank you.
Please reply if you think my three Worthy
If you'd been following Dave as assiduously as I have you would know that he thinks highly of Feldman
Boulez, Spohr and Kotzwara
Here are my three, with a brief explanation as to why in my not-so-humble opinion:
Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji - Long winded sonic muck
Karlheinz Stockhausen - Pretentious avant-garde that hasn't aged well at all
Antonio Soler - Creator of rather bland and forgettable keyboard works.
Stockhausen is hilarious, especially because it hasn't aged well. Sternklang is a favourite. That's when he was formulating compositions for the Sirius people, pun intended.
Agreed about Sorabji.
Regarding Soler, Elizabeth Chojnacka's performances get the blood boiling! But many performances are bland...
@@emtube9298 I may check this out. Thanks!
@@emtube9298 I just checked this out on TH-cam (CDs are apparently unavailable). She does make the music interesting, almost Scarlatti-like, perhaps because it sounds like she uses a big harpsichord with a nice sound (and also because she's a fine musician). Something to add to the Due for Reissue playlist?...
I expected to see Wuorinen on your list. But not all his work should be so easily dismissed. He was a hit-or-miss composer, but I recommend in particular the 3rd string quartet, the horn trio, the first piano quintet, and Time's Encomium.
I wouldn't miss those either, and neither would (almost) anyone else.
The judges who gave TIME's ENCOMIUM the 1970 Pulitzer said they did so because it was the only piece among the entries that they could hear something approaching melody in. I like that work pretty well, but I sure wish it had been realized on Moog synths instead of the RCA synth, which never sounded very good and hasn't ripened with age.
Oh, thank you for this! I SO agree! The music to Wuorinen's BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN opera had NOTHING to do with what was going on onstage by a gifted cast and stage director. NOTHING but irrelevant shrieks and random squawks from the orchestra; it amazed me that the singers could even find their pitches! The audience was fleeing in droves. P.S. Thank you for including Boulez, the most overrated composer of the 20th Century IMO, an often brilliant conductor and musician, but a TERRIBLE composer of unlistenable "music!"
More please!
1:13: I thought you were about to say, "Charles...Ives" - and my heart stopped momentarily.
I loathe Ives.
Same here. Charles Ives is remarkable.
these three omitted won't winnow my cd collection, sadly
I think you should have made it much harder. At least one has to be plausible included on, say, the top 50 composers list. I mean one of the very biggies. In a sense who among the great, greats, is your least favorite? For instance, I wouldn't be happy about it, but I would be willing to give up Tchaikovsky. My other two would Ligeti and Nyman.
Which "the top 50" composers list would that be?
I find I have (almost) totally lost interest in Tchaikovsky over the years, which is a shame considering how much money I've spent on him! The only piece I care to hear now is the string sextet.
considering multitudes of composers who couldn't even get a moment of attention, it looks like an honor to be included in this list 😂
There's no such thing as bad publicity.
'Hey, Cank....' 🤣
You did open the hate fest Pandora's box here for spluttering rage against almost anyone who wrote the music! Proving again how the arts, in general, are not always enjoyed with rational intelligence, but to a great degree emotional cues unrelated to the pure music itself. Many proto-Cancrizan's here-most interesting results of your post, eh!? I do agree with your choices, by the way-look forward to the next slug-fest.
Actually it's a sobering commentary on human nature, isn't it? It kind of explains to me why so many people voted for Trump. No one wants to pass up the opportunity to express their loathing or give the establishment "the finger," and it doesn't really matter what that "establishment" is.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Indeed Dave, I think you are correct; unfortunately. There is a marvelous book titled "Whatever it is, I'm Against It." where someone has gathered together many of the worst critiques written about many great luminaries of past and present. It is as astonishing reading, as many of the posts here are. Tho' someone's personal life experience and 'world' may have informed how they react to a particular composer's music +or--, some of the anger and disdain are disturbing. I would only add that (per your Trump allusion), our increasing 'choose a side then attack' society may let prejudice and narrow-minded comprehension/music education play a part as well.
But, after you weed out some of the shoutings, there is as always on your channel some intelligent debate and discussion; a thing we need desperately (and with civility) in a challenging society ruled by the sound bite. I always thank you for providing a forum for that, along with the learning and discoveries. All the best...
Well, from classical period I'll suggest Bernhard Hendrik Crusell, I'm not sure what he wrote beside those clarinet concerti but I pretty sure we can leave without them. Now, regarding composer of questionable content I'm more than happy to nominate Sorabji and Granville Bantock for total obliteration
Sorabji’s 1st piano sonata is a cornerstone of the genre.
Thanks for the warning.
Edward MacDowell, Max Reger and the atonalist of your choice.
There’s really nobody I would name. First, your choices were all obscure to me - I have no idea if I’d miss their music since I don’t know it but might in the future. Second, I can already see most people are naming composers they just don’t like, and sometimes coming up with absurd reasons in an attempt to make it seem like a learned and analytical opinion rather than an instinctive one. I know of composers I can do without but I wouldn’t want to impact someone else who likes them by saying “go ahead, take it all away, who cares?” Just my 2¢.
You are taking this much too seriously. Have a little fun!
@@DavesClassicalGuide I don’t know Dave, I feel like I went through this phase as an adolescent, though it was hating on stuff like Bon Jovi and New Kids On The Block rather than anyone in the classical world.
@@DavesClassicalGuide He's got a point though, even though I think your list is quite legitimate. And having met and attended composition "master classes" with the last guy on your list, I can safely say he was a source of desperation rather than inspiration. You'd have to be a moron to appreciate his empty and pompous views on music. Still, I wouldn't want to hurt Barenboim's feelings by removing such a fave of his from his shelves.
@@davidbo8400 I also attended a masterclass with Boulez. He was an old man by this stage and was in no way pompous, quite the reverse in fact, quite charming really. Yes he had very firm views on what he thought modern music should be but so what? He wasn't advocating that minimalists or others that didn't hold them should be burnt at the stake or anything. And Reich, Adams, Ades and the rest have been just as brutal to him as he's been to non-modernist composers.
@@robertunwin1148 I suppose he got softer as he became older. The charm of old age, I guess. The man himself wasn't pompous, he could even be affable really. But his views were very condescending (towards Charles Ives, Dutilleux or Jazz to name just a few) and empty (the symphony is an obsolete form). I'm glad you had a different, more beneficial experience, than I had, all said and done. Cheers.
It was until yesterday that I lived peacfully, depraved of Telemann's 3000 compositions. Should I embark now on a Telemann Crusade?
Only if you no longer want to be depraved.
I like Telemann. In fact, I think his Water Music (aka “Hamburger Ebb Und Fluss”) is better than Handel’s. At any rate, it’s less overplayed. I admit, his music can sound formulaic, but that’s partly because he wrote so much. In addition to his Water Music, his “Don Quichotte” Suite is excellent.
Telemann wrote some of the most exquisite Ouverture Suites. With all he wrote, judge him by his best work, not his most mediocre. His concerto for Gamba and Recorder is as close to baroque heavy metal as it gets.
No Telemann is great and in fact very underrated imho.JS Bach thought very highly of him which has to count for something.
I totally agree with your take on Boulez. I would happily live without Philip Glass. I saw him and his ensemble in the 1970s playing some of his Music in 12 Parts. It drove me crazy, it was so loud and my head was spinning after. I'm not particularly fond of "Minimalism" and could live without any of it, but he is the bitter end for me. Along side him I add Michael Nyman and Karl Jenkins - what pointless composers, they add nothing to my life.
From the "Golden Age", I can live without Telemann, every time I hear him I think "so what?"
I think Telemann is worth saving, if only for his Water Music, “Hambuger Ebb Und Fluss”, and his “Don Quichotte” Suite.
@@valerietaylor9615 And especially for his oratorio Der Tag des Gerichts (there's a great Harnoncourt recording of it ).
When you said Boulez, I laughed out loud!
So did I. :)
RE your comment at 7:55 about who would be upset if Boulez's music disappeared, I think many music theory professors, authors and publishers of post-tonal music theory textbooks, and maybe some old-school musicologists (as opposed to practitioners of "new musicology") would be since Structures I and II for Two Pianos are often cited as exemplars of "integral serial" compositional technique.
What's with the massive Spohr vote?? I find him subtlely really inventive in the chamber works. That inventiveness is perhaps obscured by the smooth presentation of his music - the result of a consumate and masterful technique. Thumbs up to save Spohr!!
Nah. They have a point. Masterful technique, maybe, but generally devoid of inspiration. Even Spohr himself recognized this when he talked about his string quartets being, essentially, "over composed."
Spohr's clarinet concertos are amongst the greatest in the repertoire, imo - rivaliing Mozart's. He should be saved for those alone, at least!
@@cloudymccloud00 And his Concerto for String Quartet and Orchestra, op. 131, is as good as any work of the era NOT written by a certified master. LR
@@DavesClassicalGuide Not only that, I've always thought Gilbert's line, "by Bach interwoven with Spohr and Beethoven" is much better when Brahms is substituted for Spohr.
Spohr was best when writing for unfamiliar groups of instruments. His piano trios are very fine (and influential on Brahms). See also his quintet for piano and winds, and his octet and nonet. And then there are the double quartets and the string sextet! The quartets aren't bad, but there are too many and they mostly sound like Haydn.
Boulez: So much "Importance" accorded to so little. He was dictator of French music thru arrogant personality, theorizing + political connections, embodying all that's (still) wrong with Modernism. The tyranny of Modernism: the overthrow of traditional orthodoxies, bringing artistic freedom & new ideas, ended up substituting one dogma for another, another stylistic straight jacket, music for elites. Stravinsky said Music is essentially powerless to express anything. So why has it had such an "essential" role in the history of civilization?
I walked out on Birdwhistle (sp?). I'd rather chew sand.
I add my comment just to bring a different, sincere as much as discordant point of view: Boulez is for sure one of the composers I would less ready to do without. I can easily mention Marteau, Rituel, Derive, Memorial, Sur incises among the works I listen to with true pleasure, since several decades, without ever getting bored or tired.
from the other side, I am perfectly aware that if I list a few names of composers I could do without this express my limits rather than my understanding or even taste. I would be probably prone to include Telemann, Saint-Saëns and Glass.
Dave, I'll do without Fasch as well! I agree with so many of your opinions about music, and I can agree on this point as well!
Fair enough. I've always liked Rituel.
Dave, how could you have missed off Michael 'Important' Nyman? - Yeuk
Poor Charles; such a dour fellow. I was part of the cast in "Haroun and the Sea of Stories" at NYCO, and I always felt bad for the guy. He just never seemed very happy. The piece was fun, however...
I agree about Wuorinen, but many composers I've talked to argue with me.
On the other hand, I enjoy Boulez's orchestral and ensemble music. Indeed, his Sur incises is a favorite work. The piano music I find ugly and turgid.
My three:
1. Johann Christian Bach - Although admired by no less than Mozart, his blandness bores me, but I'm not big on the pre-Classical style anyway.
2. Cesar Cui. As far as I know, he never wrote an interesting piece. Because I love Rimsky, Mussorgsky, and Borodin and think Balakirev crazy enough to be stimulating, I really went out of my way to explore. I've even heard, God help me, his opera William Ratcliff.
3. Albert Ketèlby - too quaint for me.
@steveschwartz8944 Have you looked into Gliere at all? His second symphony and his concertos are good (except maybe the cello), and the chamber music is worth investigating. I'd certainly put him above Arensky.
@ThreadBomb Unfortunately, Gliere has never done it for me, although I believe I understand why others like it.
I’m rather partial to J.C.Bach myself, and not just because he was a major influence on Mozart. His symphonies are lovely, very suave and melodic. I’ve never heard any of Cui’s music, but it must be anywhere from mediocre to terrible. Maybe that’s why he was such a savage critic of other composer’s works. His review of Rachmaninoff’s first symphony was so scathing ( I believe he said, “If there were a conservatory in Hell, Rachmaninoff would win first prize for this symphony”, or words to that effect), that Rachmaninoff fell into such a deep depression, that he stopped composing for two years and had to be treated by a hypnotherapist (which resulted in his Piano Concerto No. 2, but I won’t go into that.)
Are you the Steve Schwartz who wrote Godspell and Wicked?
@@timothybridgewater5795 No, but I wish I had his income.
I’m a trumpet player, and the Fasch is my wife’s favorite piece in my repertoire! I like it too. 😢
Dave, if one chooses Karl Jenkins or Frank Zappa, is it limited to just their classical output?
I’d be wise to just pick 3 I’ve not heard or heard extremely little of, but I (like others perhaps) don’t want to list that one (or 4) of the Boston Six in ignorant of just to get torn to shreds by a sudden wave of random of Foote fanatics. I mean, if you have never heard something and delete it from the world, then you’d never know what greatness (or crap) you’re missing out on.
Another strategy would be to strive for minimal impact. I may scrap John Corigliano. I love that one symphony of his that Barenboim recorded, but has he done anything else besides The Red Violin soundtrack? I could probably part with that one symphony then. Maybe he’s done much more than I know of? Perhaps the elder Boulanger sister would be a better example? What little music she finished in her 24 or 26 years or whatever seems pretty good, but, again, minimal impact.
Okay, okay, okay, of those with reasonably sizable catalogs that I have heard a good bit of….Boulez, John Adams, and Arnold Bax
Boo hiss. I love Bax - the clarinet sonata alone is worthwhile. Isn't Bax also an author under a different name? But also John Adams is listenable. Most boo hiss of all, is that I'm playing on the Red Violin soundtrack so you will have not paid my mortgage that month.
John Adams. I revere the Cleveland Orchestra, my hometown band, but for the life of me cannot understand why they are so smitten by Adams' music. I cannot think of a single composition by him I've heard, some of them in person, that I would want to hear again.
I was given a free ticket to hear CLE do the Transmigration of Souls (Adams). As if reading the names of the dead would redeem the empty music. At least Mahler 4 was on the same program to make it worthwhile to have sat through Adams.
@@erikthenorviking8251 If he did, it would have to be a darkly comical piece. She was strangled to death with one of her own famously long scarves which had trailed out her limousine window and got caught up in one of the wheels!
Nixon in China is one of my favorites. Seen it several times in the 90s, when the Peter Sellars production was in Frankfurt with Adams conducting.
i mistakenly read ''some of them in prison'!
Can we can add Andre Previn to this list? I saw his opera of Streetcar in Melbourne many years ago. Terrible.
I guess I can say I'm glad I saw it, but not sure exactly why I feel that way... Haha, interesting suggestion
Totally disagree. It’s a masterpiece, just needs a superb cast. Listen to the Fleming recording with the composer.
This sounds like the kind of "reverse" psychology that could appeal to a Cancrizans. 🤣 I have to give my "lizst" some thought.
I'm an amateur composer in Montreal 76 years old In the 1960's I couldn't get into modern classical music I thought I must be to conservative but twenty years later after the atonal I worship i really like new music now . When you mentioned Boulez I started to laugh yes yes I like from Part to Stephanie Ann Boyd
I like it that you mention Boyd. I think she's got a lot of promise (still in her 20s I believe).
I think your pick of Fasch is inspired. Nothing to dislike about him, but why would you need him in addition to bach and biber and telemann? I was thinking maybe there are some surplus Italian baroque composers, but they are fun. 2) this is difficult, because i can find lots to love with all famous composers, but I'm going with Prokofiev. I don't think he had that much influence. 3). Again i love much john adams music, but i think it is pastiche that is ultimately not unique. And a few things are composed to indescribably bad texts. I was looking at the ceiling has a horrible rhyme for venus.
Prokofiev's 'Peter and the Wolf' remains a classic and beloved introduction to classical music for children (it was one of my own touchstones from that stage of my life).
@@barrymoore4470 absolutely correct. I hadn't considered that. Tough choices that fortunately we don't really have to make.
I would get rid of Telemann. Sorry but I just don't get any memorable tunes or vibes at all from him.
Not even the Trumpet Concerto in D? It has a wonderful debut theme! ❤
This really gets to a highly personal level. For instance, I personally could get along very well indeed without Rachmaninoff's music. But I would never contemplate depriving anybody else of his music.
Marilyn Monroe couldn't have done without the Second Piano Concerto in the 1955 film The Seven Year Itch.
I'm now surprised Rachmaninoff didn't come to mind when I picked my 3. I picked up the EMI symphony + concertos box and it kinda sat after the first listen. it was shocking how out of date it was - I'm reading these pieces were done in the 1910s and 1920s and they felt older than Brahams at times. I admit, incredible melodies (good enough for pop stars to steal from :) ) but...the foundation under them was just so typical 19th century at a time when Ravel, Debussy, etc were pushing harmonic edges.
He couldn't claim neo-classical (he was still writing as a romantic) nor Stalin's committees (which drove Prokofiev and Shostakovich into retro) for what he did. He simply was a good Romantic composer 30 years too late to be seen as a great one.
@@catfdljws so what if Rach was out of date?
@@catfdljws Fashion has nothing to do with good music.
Audiences still love Rachmaninoff, and rightly so. His music is beautiful! And his second Piano Concerto was also used in the soundtrack to the British film, “Brief Encounter”, starring Trevor Howard, Celia Johnson, and directed by Noel Coward.
Boulez should be “famous” for a few good recordings as a Conductor, but not much as a composer.
César Cui, Friedrich Schenker, and... ELGARRRRR 🐎
I could live without Miaskovsky, without conductor Benjamin Zander and without Tihon Hrenikov.
Love this new segment, Dave. Please continue. 🥳
Fascinating question. It would be so easy to pick three fairly obscure or rarely played composers, but what about really major ones who are frequently played? There are some where I don't warm to many of their works - Elgar and Richard Strauss for example - but they still wrote enough great pieces that I would want to save them. Personally I wouldn't really miss Berlioz or Delius despite all their originality, to go alongside obvious options like Schoenberg, Webern, Stockhausen and Boulez.
I feel you are going to upset a lot of people with your third choice - and that probably won't worry you one iota.
Why should it?
No reason whatsoever. We're all entitled to have an opinion. I had two friends, sadly no longer with us, who loathed Le Sacre du Printemps, whereas I have long regarded it as one of the towering masterpieces of the 20th century.
@@johnmarchington3146 But you're right. It's the difference between fact and opinion. Let's not mix the two. I dislike all kinds of things but Sacre's importance and iconic status is beyond questioning, whether you like it or not.
When he started to say "I think, personally..." I really thought he was about to say, "Purcell" (as in Henry) and wondered why he so disliked the composer of Dido and Aeneus
Noticed it too. I sighed with relief.
I'm going to get some hate here, as I invariably do when I share my feelings about this, but Copland is 100% top of my list! I am still open to anyone that can change my mind
Why should anyone want to change your mind?
Pretty easy: no one would care about Michael Haydn (except maybe his Requiem) Franz Xaver Mozart and Siegfried Wagner, if it wasn't for their realtives..
One of the few positive things I can say about Boulez was that he was a strong, early influence on Frank Zappa. And I'd rather listen to Zappa's works than Boulez's.
For me it's Giovanni Benedetto Platti from Baroque, Judith Weir and Giacinto Scelsi from more recent times. Of course there are dozens of others I could think of!
My three are
Graupner
Xenakis
Thalberg
I think they all made some sort of a splash and they all are from different time periods
The idea of eliminating all of Pierre Boulez' compositions is such a horrifically wrong opinion. (The piano sonatas could go, and I wouldn't miss them, but how can one not appreciate "Le Marteau sans maître," "Le Visage nuptial," "Sur incises" or many other quite listenable and enjoyable works of his?)
Why can't you eliminate Adolphe Adam or Fromental Halévy instead, if you need a French composer?
Because they are infinitely superior and vastly more important.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Wow, you really don't like him, Dave, do ya?
François Couperin, Niccolò Paganini and Mark-Anthony Turnage (everybody fondly).
Francois Couperin is one of the greatest composers of the French Baroque. You must be thinking of his uncle, Louis Couperin, who isn’t in the same league with Francois.
My offering to Cancrizans:
Kuhlau, Reger and Smythe
Without Kuhlaus Elverhøj Ouverture Denmark would crumble into the sea and dissapear....
This is a really fun exercise. I personally could live without Franz Liszt but he was an important historical figure so I would never wish him away. I think many composers enjoy popularity or prominence through being in the right place at the right time, and/or through the sheer force of their personalities. And sometimes their endurance simply remains a mystery. Something I find particularly fascinating is that some very capable composers who were leading lights in their day are very seldom performed nowadays, so objective quality isn't the only determining factor in determining a composer's legacy. There will never be agreement about which composers are overrated and which ones are underrated; I think they all have (had) a role to play, be it positive or negative, and that the musical firmament is sufficiently vast to accommodate all of them. I think the plant world could be a useful (though incomplete) analogy. Some nonweeds look like weeds, and vice versa; weeds play a useful role because they are pioneer plants and grow where nothing else will grow (or before anything else will grow). Some are edible, and all of them photosynthesize. I will not bore you by spelling out the application of this metaphor to the musical universe.
Exceedingly well thought out and expressed. Thank you.
I think the same about Mozart. I prefer the weirdness of Scriabin and sorajibi with their more modern touch. Also Liszt’s sonata in b minor is in my top ten piano pieces
Are you being serious about Liszt? Liszt's virtuosity and towering piano solos works don't touch you at all? How about Consolation No. 3? That doesn't stir anything in your psyche? I guess it's hard to argue against personal preference, but Liszt, who is not really in my top, still wrote some music I find important, even if I'm not that into his works as a whole.
Liszt, the composer, is well below top rank; but his piano arrangements, e.g. of the Beethoven symphonies & Symphonie fantastique, etc. are unique, and of immense value.
I picked Boulez too, but also Spohr and Hummell (Beethoven-lite) since I though it was a cheat to eliminate composers nobody had heard of. Mind, I finally 'understood' Pli selon pli , but as Stravinsky said (before he went atonal) "Who needs it?"
JF Fasch is thoroughly enjoyable!
He is boring... Namely like Dittersdorf and Boccherini.
@@silviofernandez585 Disagree.
@@mountainbiker8904 I like the lute/guitar concerto. Nothing else has really grabbed me yet.
I like Fasch and Dittersdorf. Maybe they’re not musical giants, but their works have charm. But I consider Boccherini extremely underrated. Especially his chamber music.
Erik Satie. Please! If I never hear the Gymnopedie 1, it will be thirty years too late, at least.
I arrived late to the party -- but here goes (this is a spontaneous, unprepared list):
Fasch (zzzzzzz), Reger (yawn), Stockhausen, Xenakis (the oeuvre - not the person who was quite nice esp after a glass or three).
Going against the grain I would keep Boulez -- I mean why choose Boulez when you have Ligeti and Wuorinen....
John Adams (the composer, not the President!), Antonio Salieri and John Williams (is he considered a classical composer?) If he isn't, I''ll put John Cage in his place.
John Williams is definitely a classical as well as a film composer; he's written a number of concert works, but none of them are as interesting as his film music.
@@xxsaruman82xx87 Agree. I find John William's "classical" works are devoid of life.
I thought about eliminating Stockhausen, but as much as I absolutely hate his so-called "music", he was an early pioneer of electronic music, which eventually led to EDM and techno. Music just wouldn't be the same without his influence. I think this question isn't necessarily about which composers you don't like, but also about which ones were the least influential.
Excellent concernant Boulez 👍, en français ce n'est pas loin de boulet 🤣. . . il faut que je vérifie, j'ai au moins un CD avec son nom dessus (interprète, ou compositeur, je ne sais même pas, tellement je l'écoute peu) 😮