The future of Unsung Composers

[Lionel Harrsion]

One date-based line in the sand would be a birthdate line. Setting it at 1875, for example, would eliminate many of the transitional modernists (Bloch, Enescu, Stravinsky, etc) while keeping Strauss, Schmitt, Schmidt (and, yes, Schoenberg -- no system is perfect).

A death-date line might be another alternative.  Chill319's example of a birthdate line of 1875 would exclude Hurlstone, for example who only lived to 30 and was exclusively Romantic in style. Although to argue against myself, a death-date line of, say 1950 would exclude York Bowen, which would be equally unsatisfactory.  Indeed, no system is perfect.  I'm sure glad this isn't my decision. 

[chill319]

Whatever criteria are eventually adopted, there could be an exception, or "honorary composers," list maintained by the moderators.

The list could go both ways, permitting (potentially) a Dussek op9/2 discussion as well as (potentially) a Bax "Spring Fire" discussion.

[Alan Howe]

Again, may I express our sincere appreciation for all these contributions and the spirit in which they are offered? If I refrain from giving any direct or more detailed response, it's simply that Mark and I are not currently in a position to do the requisite work in coming up with a solution. However, do rest assured that we will be letting you know as soon as possible what we propose to do about the issues we have raised.

[Lionel Harrsion]

Yes, and I guess the 'exception or honorary composers' list need not be a 'once and for all' list but members could be allowed to suggest to the moderators names which might be deemed suitable for addition to it. 

[albion]

Arbitrary birth, death and composition dates I would suggest are simply unworkable as tight boundaries and exceptions would quickly disintegrate such an approach. If the main thrust of the forum is to limit itself to Romanticism (with a capital R) the only criterion which can even tentatively be applied is patently one of idiom (which is itself subject to myriad personal interpretations). The concern must surely be that by actively discouraging members from contributing, we not only limit the possibilities of our own musical exploration but those of other members yet unknown, effectively setting ourselves up as arbiters of taste.

Members may (or may not) be pleased to learn that I shall not be removing any items from the British and Irish archive as this is my personal collection very kindly augmented by friends and colleagues. Whilst I may not choose to listen to some of it's contents very often if at all, these recordings collectively stand (and hopefully will continue to stand) as an enormously valuable resource for listeners and researchers, not only for the intrinsic value of the music itself but as a testament to a long-gone golden age of adventurous broadcasting. Furthermore, members with important material of whatever character should definitely not hesitate in contacting me if they wish to add items to this particular archive in the future, whatever restrictions are implemented elsewhere.

I should make it clear that, as an honorary moderator, I only deal with the (loosely-termed) British section and have no remit whatsoever in other areas.

[Alan Howe]

Thanks, John, for that clear contribution. All I would say is that, by excluding the avant-garde, we have already set ourselves up as arbiters of taste. In other words, even in its current state, the forum already has boundaries which discourage the contributions of all manner of folk who would be proponents of an even wider stylistic net. Unless we allow anything and everything to be posted, a line has to be drawn somewhere. All Mark and I are saying is that, for us, it's now in the wrong place (or whatever metaphor you care to use) and that we feel we must do something about it for own sanity.

[swanekj]

This site is incredibly important for the purpose of cultural memory.  How many creations (and creators) of culture have been and are consigned to the wastebin of history by contemporary popularity?  We provide an opportunity for the entire world to REMEMBER and reconsider.

[Richard Moss]

Members have made a lot of very valuable and viable comments.  However, one aspect occurs to me - until Mark & Alan have the opportunity to decide whether (or not!) to sub-divide the site into sub-sections (e.g. pre-romantic, romantic, post-romantic) with additional administrators and the means to look across the whole (e.g. to peruse all 'Czech' music), much of the discussion is of necessity not in focus.  any such sub-division would need to be unambiguous so all sections, when placed next to each other, can form a continuous spectrum in time, space and genre.

If the decision is to say sub-divide the whole UC area (I don't use the word split as we all feel a need to retain a holistic view, I think),  thereby enabling it to cater for all tastes and to recruit further administrator capacity to deal with say non-romantic areas, then we can focus on HOW to make that sub-division work whilst retaining, as members comments clearly indicate they wish to do, a holistic capabilty across the whole UC 'domain (e.g. via tagging/common indexing).

If however for whatever reasons, Mark and Alan cannot see a way to clearly do this on a satisfactory basis, then our considerations can concentrate on HOW to live within 'acceptable' restrictions Mark and Alan have had to place on the site (and still serve the needs of most members).

Hope this helps a focus so all the ideas are relevant to the chosen way forward.

Best wishes

Richard

[britishcomposer]

Dear all,

I am late in this discussion for several reasons: I felt quite drained lately and I have no idea about the direction to which UC may move. However, I trust in the good sense and enthusiasm of our moderators and founder members Mark and Alan. Moreover, what is left to say after all those dedicated and thoughtful posts? 

My 'problem' with UC is that I am 'potentially' interested in every bit of music which is uploaded and discussed. Therefore I download nearly every piece and read every post. I suppose I have become an UC addict over the last year. I don't have the time to listen to even a minimum percentage of the pieces which I download but - well, it's nice to have them. Who knows! 
Sometimes I spend more than an hour downloading and converting music. I actually do not have the time, so in the end I sleep less and less.
I have contemplated leaving UC several times because I let myself become absorbed too much. It's hard to say: okay, I will download this and pass over this. Or upload this and not that...
Yes I know, it's my private madness, but my reason for telling you about this is to demonstrate that if I, a 'normal' UC member, gets so much absorbed by UC, how much time and energy may it cost the moderators?!
Mark and Alan, I wish you all the best and I am happy to agree to every decision, even if it may be hard for some of us.

A thought about the Downloads Section - maybe somewhat absurd: some time ago an avant-garde composer whom I know has posted links to several download-databases of new music on his blog. He commented that the internet will become the 'total archive' and had a lot of praise for all the people who spend time uploading music and sharing it with a worldwide community. According to him this means an important step in the direction of democratization of education. However, he lamented the fact that so many people upload music to so many different spaces that it is impossible to avoid scattering of information. He proposes instead to use youtube as the sole medium for uploading music. The idea make sense to me. Youtube is perhaps as popular as wikipedia. Google for a certain unsung composer and with a bit luck you will immediately find a youtube-link. But you have to convert your music into a video-file before you can upload it. Honestly, I would never have uploaded any music if it had been necessary to convert it first. And it would be a radical decision to close the Downloads Section and invite our members to start uploading to youtube...

Sorry for the confused ramble. I think I should stop now; Sir Charles is wating with the tea.

All the best,
Mathias

[Alan Howe]

Thanks, Mathias. I can assure that your post was most definitely not a ramble!

[Alan Howe]

Thanks also to Jim and Richard for your helpful contributions.

[Fronder]

[sorry for poor english]
First of all I have to thank creators of this site for their work, since unsungcomposer among with musicweb-international are, no doubt, two best internet sites devoted to classical music. I am glad that romantic music is a prime focus of this forum, since I, personally, can't even stand late of works of Scriabin\Nielsen\Sibelius\Voughan-Williams and everything more avant-garde is nothing but a cacophony to my ears.
BUT, if you are to draw a line it shoud be 1800 (first Beethoven's symphony) - 1950 (Braga Santos' fourth, which for me always sounded like a solemn funeral march for old music) or even 1955. I've studied history of music of this particular period along with repertoire of orchestras and I have to say that up to the end of WWII non-avantgarde composers were still a leading force (and far outnumbered those who composed avant-garde music) practically in all regions of the world (except for Germany, Vienna, Moscow and Leningrad). Not only in the 'old musical' countries there were dozens of late romantic composers who composed highly attractive romantic music (from Rachmaninov and Atterberg to Ropartz and Joseph Marx), but it was also a time when a lot of new composers schools were emerged all over the world - from Japan and Australia to Argentina and Chlie. These 'new musical' countries gave us literally hundreds of non-avantgarde composers (for example: André Mathieu from Canada ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDb7XAfoTfc&feature=my_favorites&list=FLD2YIXGM8G9j4yCtKiNVRwg ), Arthur Lemba from Estonia ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B_x1gv2_BY&feature=my_favorites&list=FLD2YIXGM8G9j4yCtKiNVRwg ), Fikret Amirov from Azerbaijan ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaKSX0N6GCk ) to name just a few). Rarelly their music were heard outside their native countries but today, in the age of CD and internet, it is not a problem anymore. Even in 60s and 70s there were still romantic works, especially in soviet conuntries (Svetlanov's wonderful PC for example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymu_V1LHRTQ ). I have a statistics that clearly shows that even in USA among ~110 composers whose works were published during 50s and 60s about 2\3 composed tonal works (although most of them probably were more or less avant-garde, but still). So I think it is rather unnecessary to exclude innerwar period, because the amount of great romantic music comosed during this time is just too huge to ignore. I also think it is necessary to oblige all uploaders to write short description of music they share, because among romantic works there were a lot of different styles and there are not that much people who have eclectic taste and love them all.

[Alan Howe]

No need for any apologies. You have made your point very clearly, for which I am very grateful.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I have followed the discussion from the sidelines these past few days and have thought about it.

I wasn't there in the beginning (though I did lurk when I first heard about Rufinatscha), but UC has grown into something much bigger than was either meant or expected. It is now a unique internet location where an enormous amount of music and information is coming together about unsung (undersung) composers from the past two centuries. Personally, I would be very sorry to see UC shoehorned within its original borders again. It would stifle the enthusiasm of contributing members, it would stall all momentum. A site is an organism, too. Is UC as a broad church possible? I really hope so, though I get the sense that some of the older members feel UC slipping away and becoming a different and strange place. This development must be galling. It is not as if all music uploaded is to my taste, either. As some have suggested, it would be better if all this unknown music would come with tags and a description, so that members know what sort of style they can expect.

How much does UC cost? If people are serious about it, why not contribute financially? I am an active member of the GMG Classical Music Forum, too, and I pay a small amount every month. Would it make a difference if people put money where their mouths are? Would they be allowed to do so? And would it make a difference if people offered to help out? I sincerely hope a viable way forward can be found, and that UC will remain a place where unsung-music lovers of diverse plumage can feel at home.

[Alan Howe]

Thanks, J.Z. I understand your position and we'll try to ensure that birds of varying plumages are catered for - somehow.