Who says who is an unsung composer and who says he is a sung

[eschiss1]

"Honneger"?
(Honegger wrote quite a lot of good music, imho, of which Pacific 231 isn't even especially representative (now if you'd insulted his lovely Delights of Basel 4th symphony, that'd be fighting... nah. but still. )- but I'll leave it at that.)

[dwshadle]

I think this discussion goes to show how fluid a term "great" is. All we can do is try to define it and then convince others that our definition is the right one. Throughout history, some people have been much more successful at this project than others--and all for a variety of different reasons (economic, philosophical, social, etc.).

Americans hated Brahms's First Symphony for a long time after its 1877 U.S. premiere. Yet here it stands as a "masterwork"--the piece is no different, only the people playing it and listening to it.

And, for what it's worth, I agree 100% that Draeseke's Third is could easily replace a lot of warhorses without anyone noticing their absence.

[Alan Howe]

And, for what it's worth, I agree 100% that Draeseke's Third is could easily replace a lot of warhorses without anyone noticing their absence.

Coming from a scholar, it's worth a lot!

[TerraEpon]

I'm an American and I'm not too fond out Brahms's first (despite an enjoyable big tune in the fourth movement). Hmmm....

Yet Raff's 5th? I can 'feel' that one.

[Mark Thomas]

I'm not going to waste my time any more debating the relative merits of the great and the unsung, the fairness or unfairness of it all. We have discussed this topic, or variations on it, umpteen times over the years, and it's an illusion to think that a consensus could be reached or, in some way, an impartial or objective assessment of a composer's worth could be achieved. The world isn't fair in any respect and we shouldn't expect the tiny world of art music to be any different. We are where we are, and that means that for the foreseeable future the major orchestras of the world are locked into a cycle of decline - spiralling costs and dwindling audiences constricting ever further their repertoire.

Personally, though, I'm rather upbeat because this doesn't seem to be so in every musical sphere. In recent years opera houses appear to have become more open-minded, rather than less, and the new generation of chamber ensembles and instrumentalists seem happier to take risks. What cheers me most of all, though, is the recording scene across all genres of art music from instrumental to opera. Here, the collapse of the majors, coupled with advances in technology and that more adventurous spirit amongst the younger generation of performers, has led to a golden age in the expansion of the recorded repertoire. I would never have believed when this site's predecessor was cranked up around the turn of the millennium that the unsung recorded repertoire would be where it is now. It is quite phenomenal.

Whether it is sustainable, I don't know. If the economics of live concert making continue to be so challenging, will that have a knock on effect on the recording scene? It's true that there's nothing like the live experience. I imagine that the move away from people participating in it towards enjoying music as a solo experience is yet another aspect of the growth of the cult of the individual in western society, but personally I love the ability I now have to hear music which I never thought I'd hear, even if it is only in the comfort of my own home (or car, or on a train, or whilst flying off somewhere, or in a hotel when I get to that somewhere...). There are other ways of seeing live performances: my wife and I revel in the opportunity of seeing live opera at The Met eight or nine times a year. We'd love to be able to be at the Lincoln Center itself, of course, but instead have to settle for the Cineworld multiplex in Cheltenham, UK. It's not only the Met that does this, nor are simulcast opportunities restricted to opera. It's not the same as being there, of course, but it's a pretty good second best and it's still supporting live music making.

Rather than bemoaning the situation and simply consuming the efforts of others, enthusiasts like us can and should do more to promote music we believe in, to right injustices which we feel have been done. I've done my best to help at least one unsung composer's music get recorded and performed, and that inevitably involves putting one's money where one's mouth is. I know I'm not alone here in doing that, but there is always more which could be done. Onward and upward!

[dwshadle]

Hear hear, Mark! Simply buying recordings of the music we want to hear is a way to advocate for the unsung. If the major American orchestras choose not listen to those dollars (or pounds, or euros), then so be it.

[adriano]

Yes, Mark we should hold together - and keep on loving and hoping 
And not forget that Mahler once was quite unsung too - compared to what is being done with him today.

[Alan Howe]

I think I know whose opinions I trust. Most of them are members of this forum!

Let's keep on exchanging information and opinions, etc. - and who knows where we'll be and what we'll know in another ten years...

[sdtom]

I think that this is a fine thread and very beneficial to me. I'm going to spend more time talking about the under appreciated Glazunov. Right now I'm listening to his eighth symphony a fine work.

[ignaceii]

As in my other thread. The question remains. Who got out on top as the leading composers and why ?
The same question goes for soloists. I am certain that many better musicians are left unspoken or disrespected in favor of some bunch of marketing wise better suited ones.
Volodos at least remains a champ, even after a sabbatical year.
Myaskovsky can easily be programmed, cheered by Shostakovitch. Nobody cares or knows.
Except for the labels CPO, Naxos, even Brilliant... So greatful we have them and alot of lesser known but good german radio sponsored orchestras. Otherwise we would not know either.

[MartinH]

"The same question goes for soloists. I am certain that many better musicians are left unspoken or disrespected in favor of some bunch of marketing wise better suited ones."

Boy is that the truth. I will concede that some of the top conductors have a certain something that lesser maestros bring, but there are many not-so-well known ones that are absolutely brilliant and can make music soar. Same with orchestras. I've heard Mahler played just as well in Tucson as in New York.

Soloists are really annoying. Nowadays it seems that to be a star performer you must be photogenic, young, fit. You have to look good and sexy on a cd insert. I've heard my share of legendary performers who today wouldn't fit the mould of modern marketing.

[semloh]

I agree with Mark's standpoint. Personally, I have always been fascinated by the vagaries of taste, and still enjoy trying to understand why they arise but, yes, why some composers/compositions are regarded as mainstream (sung) and others not (unsung), and what and who falls into these categories, is ground we have covered many times here on UC. There are a host of factors (e.g. musicological, sociological, psychological, political, geographical) that bring about such distinctions, of course, and we all have our views as to which factors are most important and which are most influential. I am sure we all agree, however, that it is not always the quality of the music that consigns works to obscurity or establishes its familiarity.

After over 60 years of listening to music of all kinds, nothing surprises me as to what people will praise, criticize or dismiss! 

[Double-A]

You forgot one important factor in how the distinction sung/unsung occurs:  Gender.  There doesn't seem to be even one sung woman composer in the 19th century and even in the twentieth they are extremely rare.

[semloh]

No, didn't forget gender - I only gave examples. We have discussed women composers many times here and I don't think anyone would disagree that gender is a major issue. I think the rising prominence of women composers in our own time is a very healthy sign, but that's outside the remit of UC.

[eschiss1]

Radio Klassik Austria has a night program consisting primarily of works by female composers this evening, btw (from Beach's Gaelic Symphony at midnight CET to Clara Schumann's lieder Op.23 at 2:47 am, 6 works in all, one by a modern composer (Zwilich), the others by Pejacevic, Smyth and Farrenc (her 3rd symphony, before the Schumann)).

(As to Brahms, I wonder how many of his detractors have heard a note of his chamber music (e.g. the two string sextets and the four quintets) and choral works, aside from that German Requiem (or even that, nowadays)- but I, too, digress.)