the most over played and overrated composer is...

[djealnla]

The most overrated composer/(music-destoyer) is Boulez. I HATE HIS SO CALLED "MUSIC" AND I CAN´T STAND HIM FOR A MINUTE.!!!!!

W00t? How could you dislike Sur Incises? 

[john11inc]

A bit of a waste of time if our friend has absolutely no interest or ear for contemporary music, but some of Boulez' later works are down-right. . . pretty. . .

[ahinton]

A bit of a waste of time if our friend has absolutely no interest or ear for contemporary music, but some of Boulez' later works are down-right. . . pretty. . .

Thank you again for going to the trouble to post all of this. I do wish (as I have long wished) that you did this kind of thing and argued interestingly and cogently as I know you can and sometimes do in preference to picking fights as I also know that you have an unfortunate habit of doing. In these works, Boulez demonstrates to anyone with ears to hear that he is as French a composer as Debussy who writes with a perfectly understandable love of the sheer sounds that he makes; it might be rather less obvious to some in certain early-ish works of his, such as the apparently seminal (sorry!) Deuxième Sonate for piano, but there is no denying that Boulez has something well worth saying among those pieces that you post above. As a conductor, he has, of course, done sterling service to numerous important French works, including Roussel's wondrous Third Symphony; I can only continue to wish that he had done - and indeed might do - far more for the work of his senior compatriot Henri Dutilleux who attains his 95th birthday in just a few days' time.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

If a thread gets as far as this (i.e. more than 450 posts) and one's own name has yet to be mentioned, one can perhaps take some heart in the knowledge of that absence...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

If a thread gets as far as this (i.e. more than 450 posts) and one's own name has yet to be mentioned, one can perhaps take some heart in the knowledge

that very few members know you are a composer??

Thal

[djealnla]

If a thread gets as far as this (i.e. more than 450 posts) and one's own name has yet to be mentioned, one can perhaps take some heart in the knowledge of that absence...

Best,

Alistair

for me its alistair hinton 

Haha, wrong.     

[ahinton]

Haha, wrong.      

Ah, doesn't that just go to show how one can forget the instantly forgettable! Well done for trawling through to find that post! That said, of course, "imbetter" is supposed to be better than everyone else, so perhaps that post is less than surprising.

If we are to return to trying to be serious here, it is perhaps important not only to evaluate the quality of his or her work in the context of the topic but also to define "over-played" and "overrated" by establishing means by which the statistics are ascertained for the purpose of justifying the citation of this or that composer as one or the other or both; how frequently, for example, does a composer need to receive performances in order to qualify as "over-played"?

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

Quote from: imbetter on April 17, 2007, 12:54:08 PM
for me its alistair hinton 

I can only hope you're joking here! So far, only three of Alistair's pieces have been issued on CD, and several of his pieces await even their first performance!
Having heard four pieces, and seen a few more, I can only say it's a daemn shame Alistair's music isn't more played and recorded, for they sound and look very interesting indeed, containing true originality and craftmanship!
I for one would love to hear his Piano Quintet and Concerto for 22 Wind Instruments, to name but two.

all best,
gep

[thalbergmad]

So far, only three of Alistair's pieces have been issued on CD

And one on 78.

Thal

[ahinton]

And one on 78.

No, but certainly not 78 on one CD, that's for sure.

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

The most overrated composer/(music-destoyer) is Boulez. I HATE HIS SO CALLED "MUSIC" AND I CAN´T STAND HIM FOR A MINUTE.!!!!!

Hmm, these two reviews (one reviewer) on Classics Today seem to echo your sentiments:
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=8687
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=8692

However, another one seems to completely disagree with you:
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=2380

De gustibus and all that, of course!

I myself cannot help but laugh after reading all three of them completely. I hope you will spot why after you read them. I aint going to point you to the why, though....

all best,
gep

[retrouvailles]

Hmm, these two reviews (one reviewer) on Classics Today seem to echo your sentiments:
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=8687
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=8692

However, another one seems to completely disagree with you:
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=2380

De gustibus and all that, of course!

I myself cannot help but laugh after reading all three of them completely. I hope you will spot why after you read them. I aint going to point you to the why, though....

all best,
gep

If one is informed enough to notice, one can see that the first two reviews (the negative ones) are for CDs that contain (almost) exclusively Boulez's early music, which has been mentioned as rather lacking in quality (to put it lightly), whereas the last review is for a CD that contains his later, better works that many of us here have shown to enjoy.

[djealnla]

Boulez's early music, which has been mentioned as rather lacking in quality (to put it lightly)

 

 

...

 

[birba]

Hmm, these two reviews (one reviewer) on Classics Today seem to echo your sentiments:
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=8687
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=8692

However, another one seems to completely disagree with you:
https://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=2380

De gustibus and all that, of course!

I myself cannot help but laugh after reading all three of them completely. I hope you will spot why after you read them. I aint going to point you to the why, though....

all best,
gep

I don't get it.  Was the pro-Boulez an earlier review?

[djealnla]

I don't get it.  Was the pro-Boulez an earlier review?

Elementary logic dictates that the anti-Boulez review was older, but with music critics you never know.  

[gep]

A little help perhaps?

You will notice the first two (anti-)reviews are exeedingly hostile toward Boulez the composer, performer and pretty much the man. This hostility goes rather far beyond the more customary "I do not like the music, therefor the music is inferior, for my taste is gospel" stance of most reviewers. The third (pro-)review is completely different (quote: Enjoyable, even wonderful)
Now, if you play close attention to the three reviews, something must therefor pop up as rather, well, funny. The devil is in the details, or detail (singular), I might add.

Let's see who spots it...

all best,
gep

[birba]

I give up.  Hurwitz's pro-boulez critique dates from 2000.  His anti-boulez critiques have no date.  Is this the detail?

[gep]

I give up.  Hurwitz's pro-boulez critique dates from 2000.  His anti-boulez critiques have no date.  Is this the detail?

Not the date, but Mr. Hurwitz himself! Aint it starnge that the very same reviewer in one review slashes and burnes Boulez (and not just his music, but the very person), only to praise him in another review!? I find the dichotomy rather hilarious, it doesn't do his credibillity much good, at least not to me. Having read several of his other jottings, I must say his credibility isn't raised by it either...

I mean:
There's too much good stuff out there, both old and new, for me to be able to suggest with a clear conscience that anyone invest their precious time here [i.e., Boulez's music; gep], ferreting out meager scraps of expressive meaning from an idiom consisting essentially of equal parts fear, negativity, inhibition, and aimless technique. Indeed, to say "Blow up IRCAM" would be to give that place far more credit and attention than it deserves.
against
If Boulez wanted to be popular, he would write like Poulenc, or maybe Philip Glass. This doesn't mean, of course, that he doesn't compose great, or more to the point, consistently sincere and meaningful music. He does, and this latest disc offers a case in point.
from the same reviewer, both times given as hallowed truth, now how does that sound, I ask??

all best,
gep

[ahinton]

Not the date, but Mr. Hurwitz himself! Aint it starnge that the very same reviewer in one review slashes and burnes Boulez (and not just his music, but the very person), only to praise him in another review!? I find the dichotomy rather hilarious, it doesn't do his credibillity much good, at least not to me. Having read several of his other jottings, I must say his credibility isn't raised by it either...

I mean:
There's too much good stuff out there, both old and new, for me to be able to suggest with a clear conscience that anyone invest their precious time here [i.e., Boulez's music; gep], ferreting out meager scraps of expressive meaning from an idiom consisting essentially of equal parts fear, negativity, inhibition, and aimless technique. Indeed, to say "Blow up IRCAM" would be to give that place far more credit and attention than it deserves.
against
If Boulez wanted to be popular, he would write like Poulenc, or maybe Philip Glass. This doesn't mean, of course, that he doesn't compose great, or more to the point, consistently sincere and meaningful music. He does, and this latest disc offers a case in point.
from the same reviewer, both times given as hallowed truth, now how does that sound, I ask??

If I were being at my most charitable, I might venture that it signifies the kind of change of mind of which Sorabji wrote when stating that the great thing about changing one's mind is having a mind to change in the first place but, given the identity of the "critic" concerned, such a charitable interpretation would sadly be entirely misplaced.

Best,

Alistair

[john11inc]

Boulez's early music [...] has been mentioned as [being] rather lacking in quality (to put it lightly).

I'd just like to go on the record and say that I certainly didn't express such a thing, nor would I.  Boulez' early works are often just as good, and at the least more original; they are, simply, in a much less accessible voice.

[ahinton]

I'd just like to go on the record and say that I certainly didn't express such a thing, nor would I.  Boulez' early works are often just as good, and at the least more original; they are, simply, in a much less accessible voice.

This last part is undoubtedly true, although I'm not entirely certain about the first; Boulez's early (or rather earliest known) works are indeed "original", but acceptance of that fact begs (or perhaps should beg) the question of whether and/or to what extent "originality" per se is "good" in the sense of being guaranteed - or even likely - to enable the production of works that are likewise "good". To this day I still struggle with his Deuxième Sonate; a seminal work, evidently and one that the composer himself could and did play in the immediate aftermath of its completion (has anyone here been around long enough and in the right place to have heard Boulez play, by the way?), yet one that still communicates little to me even after many years of familiarity with it. It is perhaps no mere coincidence that works of that period in Boulez's life emerged at a time when Boulez himself was presenting his most radical stances and polemical attitudes in more general terms; I prefer to think (and, I believe, can do so with good reason) that Boulez has not so much "mellowed" since then as "matured". Nowadays, he sounds as French as Debussy; indeed, some of music could not sound more French if he included French folksongs in it (a somewhat unlikely scenario, I think!)...

Anyway, the thread topic is about overplayed and overrated composers. Although I am sometimes given to wonder if that Deuxième Sonate might be overrated by some, it is certainly not overplayed, even by those pianists who include it in their repertoires and, in general terms, it would never occur to me to claim that Boulez is either overrated or overplayed; it is therefore less than obvious to me why he is being discussed here in the context of the topic.

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

To this day I still struggle with his Deuxième Sonate

In reaction to this I took out the recording I have (Idil Biret, Naxos) and must say I quite enjoyed the work. Of course, I cannot listen so "deeply" as you can because I am not a composer, but still. The scintillation of the first movement (like sunlight reflecting of a water surface in motion), the colourfulness of the second, the almost "dansant" third and the fourth in which all that is combined provide an interesting journey.

question of whether and/or to what extent "originality" per se is "good" in the sense of being guaranteed - or even likely - to enable the production of works that are likewise "good".

Too many work of modern art suffer from a mistaken "enforcement" to be original in the sense that what one produces cannot and may not sound or look like anything else, and turn out to not sound or look like anything much. To be truly original in the present one must acknowledge the past, I think. Reaching a goal involves knowing the whole road that leads there.

all best,
gep

[ahinton]

Too many work of modern art suffer from a mistaken "enforcement" to be original in the sense that what one produces cannot and may not sound or look like anything else, and turn out to not sound or look like anything much. To be truly original in the present one must acknowledge the past, I think. Reaching a goal involves knowing the whole road that leads there.

Yes; I think that one symptom of this is the kind of regrettable blurring of distinction in some people's minds between originality and individuality that caused one commentator to write of a particular work that its composer was trying hard to be original like almost everyone else...

I'm glad that you get as much as you do from Bou Two!..

Best,

Alistair

[11ngerman]

I'll say Bach!
Although I do not think he is Overrated, he is over played (for good reason!) 

[ch101]

mozart: why do people play his immature works so often ---here i particularly mean his early works

[overfjell]

Bach. Overrated and Overplayed, he's got so me beautiful works, but people I know just go on about him like he was the second coming of Jesus.

[birba]

Overrated and overplayed?!?!?!?!?  BACH?!?!?!?  I'm really at a loss for words.  

[overfjell]

Overrated and overplayed?!?!?!?!?  BACH?!?!?!?  I'm really at a loss for words.  

Don't get me wrong, I love Bach's music, I'm just sick of him being apotheosised, I'd much rather listen to Handel, Purcell or Scarlatti than Bach. I feel like the Baroque era is kinda just overshadowed by this ever present looming shadow of Bach, Bach and more Bach. Even earlier Baroque composers like Monteverdi are overlooked because of Bach.

[birba]

Well, now I sort of get your gist.  Overplayed but not overrated.  Well, overplayed doesn't even sound right.  But on the other hand, when was the last time I heard one of Handel's suites in concert on a beautiful steinway grand?  Uh, let's see...never.  A smithering of Scarlatti here and there.  There's another woderful italian composer never played ever - Padre Martini.  And there's very little of his music in the IMSLP.  I have a collection of his suites for keyboard - I must work up one of them.

[overfjell]

Well, now I sort of get your gist.  Overplayed but not overrated.  Well, overplayed doesn't even sound right.  But on the other hand, when was the last time I heard one of Handel's suites in concert on a beautiful steinway grand?  Uh, let's see...never.  A smithering of Scarlatti here and there.  There's another woderful italian composer never played ever - Padre Martini.  And there's very little of his music in the IMSLP.  I have a collection of his suites for keyboard - I must work up one of them.

I did hear Richter play Handel's keyboard suites, they sound beautiful, I just wish more Baroque was recognised, its such an interesting era of music, not my personal favourite, and I think Bach is the biggest thing about Baroque, but Handel's music has just as much merit I must listen to this Padre Martini

[jollisg]

Overplayed: Mozart and Beethoven
Overrated: Bach (I think)

[stevebob]

Overrated: Bach (I think)

That's funny, though it's probably unintentional.

[stoudemirestat]

I just read through this thread, I don't understand the Schumann bashing on this forum...Firstly I LOVE his music...IMO his solo piano work is some of the best in the repertoire, his piano concerto is one of the best in the repertoire...His lieder is terrific, probably second only to Schubert, his chamber music is good, and his symphonies while not the greatest, are very good themselves. This is the ONLY place where Schumann seems to be ridiculed - great pianists love him, and I frequent many different forums and they all LOVE his music. Even the forums with the most educated classical music  listeners, with very broad knowledge of the standard repertoire AND not so standard, really serious classical music listeners, love Schumann and rate him very highly. I don't understand why this is not the case on this forum...Schumann bashing seems to be a very common occurence on here, but you guys are the only ones doing it!

[pianoplayjl]

I just read through this thread, I don't understand the Schumann bashing on this forum...Firstly I LOVE his music...IMO his solo piano work is some of the best in the repetoire, his piano concerto is one of the best in the repetoire...His lieder is terrific, probably second only to Schumann, his chamber music is good, and his symphonies while not the greatest, are very good themselves. This is the ONLY place where Schumann seems to be ridiculed - great pianists love him, and I frequent many different forums and they all LOVE his music. Even the forums with the most educated classical music  listeners, with very broad knowledge of the standard repetoire AND not so standard, really serious classical music listeners, love Schumann and rate him very highly. I don't understand why this is not the case on this forum...Schumann bashing seems to be a very common occurence on here, but you guys are the only ones doing it!

I have to agree on what you say. I've never heard any of his lieder but the dedication arrangement by Liszt and it is fantasically fantastic. I've never heard any music that could be compared to fantasie Impromptu in similarity in my opinion. His music are one of the things that really define the Romantic period. There is no reason to hate Schumann because personally I find he and Chopin's music have similarities and sometimes I could not distinguish between the two. Almost everyone hates Schumannn in this forum. I don't see many people hate Chopin. In my opinion every composer mentioned frequently (like Bach, Beethoven, Chopin, Brahms, Liszt, Rach, Tchai) and their music have been over played but NOT overated. Their music has become so overplayed to the point we can virtually predict what will happen in the music and most interpretations of the same work I hear are very similar. Some people can already recognise music by composers even though they've never heard the work before. I believe their music must remain part of the standard concert repertoire but I also believe that the overlooked composers must get their music heard more frequently. Maybe 1 performance of a composer's works is enough to bring more fame to the composer. In piano competitions I watch from youtube and their programs I google, rarely do I come across a name I can't recognise.

So in conclusion: Overplayed: the big guns
                       Over rated: NONE

JL

[megadodd]

I have to agree on what you say. I've never heard any of his lieder but the dedication arrangement by Liszt and it is fantasically fantastic. I've never heard any music that could be compared to fantasie Impromptu in similarity in my opinion. His music are one of the things that really define the Romantic period. There is no reason to hate Schumann because personally I find he and Chopin's music have similarities and sometimes I could not distinguish between the two. Almost everyone hates Schumannn in this forum. I don't see many people hate Chopin. In my opinion every composer mentioned frequently (like Bach, Beethoven, Chopin, Brahms, Liszt, Rach, Tchai) and their music have been over played but NOT overated. Their music has become so overplayed to the point we can virtually predict what will happen in the music and most interpretations of the same work I hear are very similar. Some people can already recognise music by composers even though they've never heard the work before. I believe their music must remain part of the standard concert repertoire but I also believe that the overlooked composers must get their music heard more frequently. Maybe 1 performance of a composer's works is enough to bring more fame to the composer. In piano competitions I watch from youtube and their programs I google, rarely do I come across a name I can't recognise.

So in conclusion: Overplayed: the big guns
                       Over rated: NONE

JL

JL

Utterly agree with you. Great post!!

[keyboardkat]

I adore Schumann's symphonies - I think they are thoroughly successful in realizing classical ideals using the full resource of the symphony orchestra. I wish I could say the same about his piano works. I'm at loss as to why the Fantasy op. 17 or Sonata op. 22 are considered masterpieces. If they're not overplayed, they are certainly overrated in my book.

The Sonata Op. 22, maybe.  But the great Fantasie in C, op. 17?   How can you say that?  But of course most of us hear these works in their bowdlerization by Clara, who was embarrassed by her husband's romanticism and recomposed certain parts of his works.
For example, in the original autograph, the ending of the first movement of the Fantasie, with its quote of Beethoven and its pianissimo dominant chords over a held tonic bass, is also the ending of the third movement.  This changes the character of the piece, and also unifies, it.  But we usually hear the conventional, dull perfunctory ending of the third movement as found in most editions.

[haydnseeker]

I don't see many people hate Chopin.

Indeed not.  Last year, Gramophone magazine had an anniversary feature about Chopin.  Their reviewer included quotes from many prominent pianists who all admired Chopin's music.  He said that he was hoping to include comments from some players who disliked it - but he couldn't find any, even among those who don't include Chopin in their concert repertoires!

[jalexh]

Indeed not.  Last year, Gramophone magazine had an anniversary feature about Chopin.  Their reviewer included quotes from many prominent pianists who all admired Chopin's music.  He said that he was hoping to include comments from some players who disliked it - but he couldn't find any, even among those who don't include Chopin in their concert repertoires!

Ives said some nasty things about Chopin.

[bachbrahmsschubert]

To add to the Schumann hate: I find his music to be the most boring example of 19th century music available. There are, of course, exceptions (I enjoy the Frauenliebe und Leben).

From a pianist's standpoint, there are sections of his music that are truly uncomfortable to play (many parts of the concerto, for example). The time put into practicing his music, for me, is not worth the finished product.

From a theorist's standpoint, I see a lot of Chopin and a lot of awkward counterpoint. It bores me. I am not intrigued by his ideas, although there are some exceptions.

The only recording I care for is Leon Fleisher's recording of the piano concerto. The first movement cadenza is absolutely astonishing.

Maybe this will clear the air a little. Maybe not. Meh.

Best wishes,

[thalbergmad]

To add to the Schumann hate: I find his music to be the most boring example of 19th century music available.

My thoughts exactly. Unimaginative teutonic trash.

Thal

[rv]

overplayed: Liszt & Chopin
overrated: Beethoven. There, I've said it.

[jalexh]

From a theorist's standpoint, I see a lot of Chopin

!

Your ears are broken  


I prefer Schumann's piano music to that of Chopin and Liszt. As a composer he was much more versatile than Chopin anyway (though credit to Chopin for knowing what he was good at, and damn he was good at it), with his wealth of admirable music not for piano. And that stuff is certainly not overplayed, nor overrated.

[megadodd]

overplayed: Liszt & Chopin
overrated: Beethoven. There, I've said it.

Liszt overplayed? I'm sure many never even heard of more than 20 of his works 

[jalexh]

Based entirely on my own impressions from my own experience compared with what I have read and heard from others.

Overrated: Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff, Rimsky-Korsakov (make that Russian Romantic music in general except Mussorgsky), Saint-Saens, Bruckner, and all that Holy Minimalist junk from Part, Gorecki et al.

Underrated: Purcell, Handel, D Scarlatti, CPE Bach, Gluck, Haydn (though this is improving), Mozart (on this forum at least), Weber, Schumann, Berlioz, J Strauss II (if only because many seem afraid of professing a liking for pure entertainment), Webern, Britten. Maybe Shostakovich and Bartok a little bit too.

Renaissannce composers are a curious case in that overall they are underrated since few people bother listening to them, but amongst those who do they tend to be wildly overrated. Music still had a way to develop at that time and not much Renaissance music can be compared favourably to anything from late-Baroque onwards.

Bach is undoubtedly a compositional demi-god who wrote reams of music of astonishing quality, and it is hardly correct to call him overrated, but I wish some fanatics would acknowledge that occasionally his music lapses in to the mechanical and, dare I say it, boring.

Beethoven will be underrated until the day when it is universally acknowledged that he was the best thing ever to happen in music, and that the Diabelli Variations are the crowning jewel of the solo piano literature

[bachbrahmsschubert]

!

Your ears are broken  


I prefer Schumann's piano music to that of Chopin and Liszt. As a composer he was much more versatile than Chopin anyway (though credit to Chopin for knowing what he was good at, and damn he was good at it), with his wealth of admirable music not for piano. And that stuff is certainly not overplayed, nor overrated.

Well, they may very well be, but I study his music with my eyes. My eyes see what they see in Chopin and Schubert before him. Often times when one mimics another composer, one still manages to develop an individual style; such as Schubert did with Beethoven. Schumann is just...boring.

We are certainly not arguing preferences here; however, many of these posts are based on "that one time I heard that once piece and it sucked. OVERRATED." People criticize the works of others before knowing that composer, which is done away from a piano and away from just listening to the music.

Now, if you want to get into a discussion about Schumann's below average orchestration skills...

Best wishes,

[jalexh]

Well, they may very well be, but I study his music with my eyes. My eyes see what they see in Chopin and Schubert before him. Often times when one mimics another composer, one still manages to develop an individual style; such as Schubert did with Beethoven. Schumann is just...boring.

Hmm. I really don't hear (nor see) much Chopin in Schumann. Look even at the forms they use; Chopin prefers the single short miniature, Schumann the set of 'character pieces'. Neither composer's style would work well if transferred to the other form; Schumann's cycles allow for the restlessness and frequent changes of mood which would be denied to him in isolated miniatures; Chopin's perfectly contained gems would be utterly ruined if hung together like Schumann's works. And they thought of musically very differently too; Schumann being one of the first composers to conceive of a union between literature and instrumental music and strongly tied to programmatic works, compared with Chopin's absolute music. Chopin never really understood Schumann's music at all.

Now, if you want to get into a discussion about Schumann's below average orchestration skills...

I'll not argue with you there   . It never manages to sound better than 'barely passable' even in the best performances (ie the ones in which the conductor has fixed the particularly horrendous passages).

Not that there's much good to say about Chopin in that department either.

[revanyoda777]

Ha! I love your taste in music Thalbergmad. I've always detested Brahms and Schumann and honestly thought there was something wrong with me. I can't help it; after years of trying to listen to them, I feel like jumping off a bridge every time I do. (Brahms is a little more tolerable though)

[thalbergmad]

I've always detested Brahms and Schumann and honestly thought there was something wrong with me.

Nothing wrong with you at all. If there is, then there is something wrong with me and a fair few others that vomit at the thought of listening to more Schumann. I can tolerate Brahms a little more, but I cannot see that happening with Schumann.

The Sonata Op.22 was on the Radio last week and I forced myself to listen to it in an attempt to notice any musical gift, but heard nothing. It was devoid of any interest, completely barren in all respects and I will never again waste time on this non work.

Schumann was an all round musical failure (composer, pianist & critic) and his reputation as one of the great romantics is perhaps built more on the work of his wife than the quality of his compostitions.

I have nothing against those who love him, but submit a few might change their opinion if they expanded what they play and listen to.

Thal

[fftransform]

Haydn, Schumann, Grieg, Dvorak, Brahms, Mahler, Mendelssohn, Faure, Delius, Milhaud, Franck, Poulenc, Hindemith, Honegger, Tchaikovsky, Puccini, Satie, Copland, Torke, Weber, Berlioz, Vaughan Williams, Walton, Messiaen, Chausson, Dallapiccola, Maderna.

While several of those composers are important, historically, I get absolutely no enjoyment out of listening to their music, with the possible exception of a couple pieces, here and there.

[ahinton]

Haydn, Schumann, Grieg, Dvorak, Brahms, Mahler, Mendelssohn, Faure, Delius, Milhaud, Franck, Poulenc, Hindemith, Honegger, Tchaikovsky, Puccini, Satie, Copland, Torke, Weber, Berlioz, Vaughan Williams, Walton, Messiaen, Chausson, Dallapiccola, Maderna.

While several of those composers are important, historically, I get absolutely no enjoyment out of listening to their music, with the possible exception of a couple pieces, here and there.

Mon Dieu, quelle list! What you get enjoyment out of, however, is not the thread topic, which is about the most over-played and over-rated composer (in whomsoever's opinion).

Best,

Alistair