Unmistakable voices

[Alan Howe]

I didn't say that either. I was merely arguing that the fact that a particular piece in the conservative tradition isn't by Mendelssohn or Schumann doesn't mean it must be by Reinecke! That's simply not an inference one can draw. In any case, I'd describe his music as a clear extension of that tradition - hardly surprising since he lived for over half a century beyond the deaths of the two earlier composers.

[eschiss1]

True, true (no argument there from me ), and I think that while I may have been responding to a somewhat earlier post of yours in the thread (but still overshooting in my response) I did still have to start wondering, in relation to this thread, if I could identify what it was about the best (subjectively-put...) pieces by certain composers in that tradition also that means almost by definition that something in their style must have fingerprints (... ok, a low bar to set, put that way)..., I think,

else it would be hard for them to have produced something memorable enough to float so high in a saturated memory (I think of some of the movements of Robert Fuchs' string quartets -  the slow movements of the first and fourth - e.g.)

[Alan Howe]

Agreed, Eric. Perhaps we can explore this further, composer by composer...? Maybe we could start with Bruch?

[eschiss1]

Based on what I know reasonably or even moderately well by Bruch (less than the works I've heard only a few times by him, which is less than the larger number of works I've seen in some form of score, etc.) I think with Bruch I may have to concede the point; stylistically not so distinctive, I don't know if with a work I haven't heard yet, an innocent-ear test (where's Robert WL Simpson when one needs him? - we could use an equivalent program on some station hereabouts in the States), I could say "oh, this is Bruch!..." as I did with a Berwald work as I mentioned (I get those things wrong more than not though...) - but still memorable at his best.

[JimL]

Bruch has some orchestrational quirks that are distinctive.  Features the French horn an awful lot.  On those grounds, I'd say I could pick out Bruch, but not by anything particular about his harmonies or melodies.

[Amphissa]

Well, I'm going to be contrarian here. Ten seconds is a very short snippet of music. I would posit that, if it is a piece you are well familiar with, you would know who wrote it even if you could not identify the exact piece.

However, I would suggest that, if it is not a piece you are familiar with, it would be very difficult to know who wrote it just from a ten second snippet. And if it is by a composer you are not especially familiar with, you are unlikely to think it by that composer.

[Alan Howe]

Good point well made.

[Gauk]

And this is precisely the point of the original post ...

I find if I turn the radio on and some unfamiliar piece is playing, I can often work out who the composer is (not infallibly) but it is often a slow process of elimination. Getting it at once, after only a couple of bars, means distinctiveness of a high order, which most of the composers mentioned so far do not have, I would say.

This is not to say that a high degree of distinctiveness necessarily equals high quality. I had this discussion with someone once who pointed out that one could acquire instant recognisability rather crudely if determined. To give an exaggerated example, had Rott been even madder, and decided that all his works would have the first beat in every single bar marked by the triangle, one would only have to listen for the triangle to recognise it as Rott.

I know for certain I can't recognise Verdi after ten seconds; it usually takes me a few minutes if it is something I don't know. Bruckner I think I could, if someone discovered a symphony of his I had never heard.

[JimL]

I recall one of my proudest feats in my early 20s was to determine, both by deduction and by familiarity with another work by the same composer, that a concerto playing on the radio, previously unheard by me, was Anton Rubinstein's 5th PC.

[chill319]

A friend of mine who taught a masters-level seminar on Bruckner symphonies surprised his class by unexpectedly giving a no-essay, drop-the-needle (LP days) final exam: identify the symphony and movement for each of 40 different 5-second excerpts played. Zero essay questions, but I guarantee you that any student who got 90% or more correct had some worthwhile insight to share regarding Bruckner's symphonies.

[Alan Howe]

...but I guarantee you that any student who got 90% or more correct had some worthwhile insight to share regarding Bruckner's symphonies.

Or just knew the music very well.

[Gauk]

Also I recall a guest on the BBC show "Face the Music" - I think it was Lorin Maazel - who was given the test of identifying three orchestral works by their first note alone. The rationale was that conductor is always listening particularly carefully to the first sound an orchestra makes. He got all three right. The last one was a single horn note - the opening of Schubert's Great C Major.

But again, this is a question of identifying known works, not recognising a composer's style from a few bars.