I am curious about which composers the member sthink deserve to be unsung. Simply put, who do you consider worthless composers? Should be fascinating.
Sorry but this reply will not be at all helpful to you ;D
One could argue that if any listener finds that a piece of music appeals to them then the composer of that piece, by definition, cannot be entirely worthless and I cannot imagine that there are any composers of whom it can be said that there are absolutely no persons who see value in their music.
No doubt there may be many "amateurs" around who wrote or are writing some pretty dreadful stuff but I don't think those are the people we could necessarily identify with any degree of respectable decency ;D
There are some composers you would have to tie me up and force me to listen to but even they I would not assert are "deservedly unsung" ;D
Sorry, again, I know this is not a helpful response :( ;D
I was looking for personal opinions only. I'll start.....Feldman, Carter and Boulez.
MODERATOR'S WARNING:
This will only be a profitable thread if people express their opinions courteously and give reasons for those opinions.
Quote from: Alan Howe on Thursday 02 February 2012, 16:43
MODERATOR'S WARNING:
This will only be a profitable thread if people express their opinions courteously and give reasons for those opinions.
And perhaps it moight not be too bad an idea if contributors to it also adhered to reasonable degrees of accuracy; I did not see the post concerned as it was before you edited it to what it is now but, given its present manifestation, "Feldman, Carter and Boulez" are hardly "unsung" in any case!
Quite right. Carter and Boulez are definitely sung composers. Feldman has also been extensively recorded...
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/Name/Morton-Feldman/Composer/3688-1 (http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/Name/Morton-Feldman/Composer/3688-1)
I am sorry, Tapiola, but I do think you've set up a pointless thread.
If I told you, and other forum members, that I happen to think so-and-so is a pretty worthless composer and the world would be a better place if she was unsung, then how would you or anyone else possibly benefit from my immense erudition on the matter?????
Reminds me of truly awful schooldays when grubby little boys would congregate behind the school pavilion at break time, puff at a fag, and try to identify a girl with whom we wouldn't want to be seen dead.
Thank heavens we, or most of us, grew up!!
I don't think the thread is pointless, provided that opinions are expressed carefully and reasons are given. However, any sign of it going pear-shaped and it'll be pulled!
I suppose if I think about it, I can't think of too many deservedly unsung composers, but I can think of a number of deservedly unsung compositions. In this category would come, to my mind at least, Prout's Symphony No.4 which I find to be terribly dry and academic. Nevertheless, I'm glad to have heard it so as to fill out the broader context of British music in that era.
To me, Boulez would come in a different category - that of the undeservedly sung! Why? Because I find his compositions to be more akin to theoretical mathematics than music which communicates something meaningful. Of course, I recognise that it may be entirely my fault and I'm always grateful when someone gives me a key to unlock what has hitherto been beyond my pitiful powers of comprehension...
As you've started so well, Alan, I'll leave you to moderate this can of worms. Good luck!
Well thank you, dear colleague! :-\
I think it best to steer away from the "undeservedly sung." Besides, didn't we already have a thread on that a couple of months ago? It was actually titled something like "music I just don't get," but don't we often have a tendency to devalue that which we don't understand? I can think of many, many composers who I didn't "get" earlier in my life (or even fairly recently), and whose music I've subsequently come to love and admire.
My prime nomination for "deservedly unsung" would have to be Roy Harris' 13th Symphony. Premiered in 1976 by the National Symphony, it lay unheard for decades. I wondered why, once I learned of its existence, since I value much of Harris' other output highly. Well, once I heard a recent revival on YouTube (and I think the work was posted on our Downloads as well), I fully understood why. This is an embarassment of a composition from any composer, let alone a major one such as Harris! Trite, banal, simplistic, shallow, pretentious, are all adjectives that come to mind.
Mind you, there's VERY little music where I don't find something to like about it. I usually find some redeeming quality in most anything I hear. But this work is not even remotely approaching tolerable!
I did not intend to come back into this thread but Latvian's mention of the Harris Bicentennial Symphony does impel me to return ;D
It is terribly sad when one comes across a fine composer whose later works show such a definite decline in quality but this, unfortunately, seems to have been the case with Harris. If he had stopped after Symphony No.9 his reputation might have been higher than it currently appears to be. I know that people view the 9th symphony in different ways and there is something to be said in favour of the one-movement Symphony No.11(recorded by Albany) but, much as I love and admire the earlier Harris symphonies, I have to admit that Nos. 10, 12 and 13/14-the Bicentennial-are almost embarrassingly poor. The 10th 'Abraham Lincoln' and the 12th 'Pere Marquette' are dirge-like and boring and Latvian has summed-up the Bicentennial. Whether the last would sound appreciably better with a first-rank orchestra(such as the National Symphony Orchestra of Washington which gave the first and only full professional performance) I don't know but I doubt it :( :(
(I wonder if the apparent decision of Naxos not to proceed with their Harris series came after they realised just how poor these last symphonies actually are ???)
I love Roy Harris, but yes, the 13th Symphony was simply awful. No other word for it. It was past time for him to set down his pen. I see that this thread was a bad idea. Hopefully the moderators can eliminate it.
Quote from: Tapiola on Thursday 02 February 2012, 20:23
I love Roy Harris, but yes, the 13th Symphony was simply awful. No other word for it. It was past time for him to set down his pen. I see that this thread was a bad idea. Hopefully the moderators can eliminate it.
Oh.....you think the moderators should eliminate the thread ::) Just after I wrote about Roy Harris :o
We could at least continue to discuss composers like Harris whose later works demonstrate appreciable decline in quality ???
About Boulez I will say only this: if he didn't do so much conducting his music would be performed a whole lot less frequently. ;D
Quote from: JimL on Thursday 02 February 2012, 20:31
About Boulez I will say only this: if he didn't do so much conducting his music would be performed a whole lot less frequently. ;D
Ouch! Very true, though! ::)
No, I don't care for the music of Pierre Boulez one little bit. I cannot listen to it with any pleasure, I cannot comprehend what it means or signifies, what emotions (if any) it is intended to touch. It has, as has been said, a rigorous, mathematical, intellectual aspect which means nothing to me.
..........but I also know that friends whose views I respect admire the music intensely and-for that reason-I have no business to say that it does not deserve to be heard by those who can appreciate its qualities.
Ah, a can of worms indeed...
With regard to Boulez, my problem with him stems less from his music (which I don't ´get' or appreciate but can ignore) than from his overzealous and fundamentalist attitude to the whole craft of music-making, which has estranged 'art' music from its audiences - an experience from which we're still recovering and which might have meant the end of a whole art form.
Returning to the original post, it seems to me that a requisite for a 'deservedly' unsung work is that it contains little or no conceptual originality, AND that it shows poor technical skill. That rather narrows the field, but think I may nominate Lorenzo Perosi's Piano Concerto. Rambling on for a seemingly endless three quarters of an hour, to me it is the biggest blight on the reputation of Vatican City since the Inquisition.
Well, lots of other conductors conduct Boulez' music. I know several who do...
And as for "estranging art from its audiences", a rare performance of Pli selon Pli in London was, I am told, made to a full house ...
Forum history demonstrates that no good will come of this.
For once, I will remain silent and sit back and watch the chaos.
£5 says this will be locked within 24 hours.
Thal
Earlier this afternoon I think I may have clicked the wrong icon and erased a message I had just finished. Well, who knows?
I wonder where this thread might go. It might be interesting if Slonimsky's delightful Lexicon of Musical Invective served as a guide as would Stravinsky's remark about Richard Strauss to the effect that he did not like any of that composer's large works and, for that matter, any of his small ones either. A caution to us all, I suppose. Nevertheless the composers Slonimsky chose are all sung now, and Strauss has certainly paid his dues even if Stravinsky didn't like his music.
The example of the later Harris symphonies is very much to the point. Before long I will upload Howard Hanson's contribution to the genre, his Centennial Ode, eminently forgettable, using snippets of his other music and narrating the history of the University of Rochester.
There is probably not a single piece on this website that would not make someone want to bite the radiator. That is a wonderful thing.
But I don't see the virtues in this thread as a dumping ground for nya-nya-nyas directed from Dittersdorf
to Dutilleux.
This should be an interesting challenge. I have uploaded music that I actively dislike and others have said
how much they enjoyed hearing it.
If that is a case I rest it.
Best from Shamokin88
I'd forgotten about Perosi. Oh dear. I have tried. A number of times. Honestly. Please don't ask me to try again. Please...
Not really within the musical scope of this website, but F. Osmond Carr, who wrote the score to W.S. Gilbert's "His Excellency", was, judging by that score, deservedly forgotten within a very few years, although he had composed the first ever musical comedy "In Town". As a teenager, I remember ploughing through the (very expensive) score of "His Excellency" and thinking what Sullivan might have made of it.
I always thought of Parry's "Job" as deservedly unsung, but have changed my mind lately. That's the problem: I find it hard to dismiss any music without worrying that it may have more to it that I have not been able to get. Even among Boulez: his fans may all be pretentious snobs, but maybe they actually enjoy listening to his works. Actually, I know they all prefer the 'Trout Quintet' and the '1812 Overture' in private.
I'm with Thal on this. As I pointed out recently in another thread, sometimes it's better just to keep one's mouth shut. And I think this is one of those times......
Jerry
Thanks Ilja and Alan, for mentioning Perosi, because this reminds that I want to buy the CD with music for violin and orchestra. Lovely audio samples, just listen here (http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/Lorenzo-Perosi-1872-1956-Violinkonzert-Nr-2/hnum/7213746). His concerto for clarinet is not bad either and I've just ordered his PC from Amazon.co.uk because the audio samples (http://www.amazon.com/gp/recsradio/radio/B00007E8RD/ref=pd_krex_dp_001_001?ie=UTF8&track=001&disc=001) sound interesting enough to me. No, for me Perosi is unjustified neglected ;D
I find samples of Perosi's music much more attractive than listening to him at length! It's the way his music seems to ramble aimlessly that simply bores me beyond endurance. Apologies!
No apologies needed, Alan. I'm just curious and want to listen to the whole concerts. I can afford me a few extra CDs.
Quote from: Alan Howe on Thursday 02 February 2012, 22:50
I find samples of Perosi's music much more attractive than listening to him at length! It's the way his music seems to ramble aimlessly that simply bores me beyond endurance. Apologies!
That's funny. I felt the same way about Pfitzner's PC when I downloaded it recently. But - I'll give it another shot before I jump to any conclusions.
In my opinion, these opinions of Boulez are baseless, untrue, and need some rebuttal. So ok, Boulez didn't write in the manner of Beethoven, Brahms, Raff, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, Mahler and the gang. Tunes are not his thing. But having attended live performances of some of his music, especially those based on spatial sounds from many directions, the music can be quite mesmerizing, provocative, intoxicating, scary even, and beautiful. There are a lot of composers some of you probably hate: Ligeti, Leibowitz, Messian, Reich -- but have you really tried to hear what the composer is saying? In the same line, Gavin Bryars "Sinking of the Titanic" is an engrossing masterwork that once heard is never forgotten. Sure, this music is difficult in that it demands you pay attention. You can't read the newspaper, tend the baby, or do crosswords at the same time. Gentlemen: open your ears! Music did not stop in 1910. There's a lot of great 20th music that you could enjoy so much besides Prokofieff, Shostakovich, Sibelius and other less avant garde composers.
I guess there is some deservedly unsung music -- it's a crowded field, after all. But if I had to name a work or two that deserved banishment to the dustbin of history: Arthur Schnabel's 2nd Symphony. And hot on its heels: Emil Tabakov's 3rd. I like to think I have "big ears", but lordy I despise both of those wretched symphonies. I keep them as a reminder that just because its recorded doesn't mean I should buy it!
PS: anyone else like the work of Subotnik?
QuoteIn my opinion, these opinions of Boulez are baseless, untrue, and need some rebuttal. So ok, Boulez didn't write in the manner of Beethoven, Brahms, Raff, Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, Mahler and the gang. Tunes are not his thing. But having attended live performances of some of his music, especially those based on spatial sounds from many directions, the music can be quite mesmerizing, provocative, intoxicating, scary even, and beautiful. There are a lot of composers some of you probably hate: Ligeti, Leibowitz, Messian, Reich -- but have you really tried to hear what the composer is saying?
Well put. I might add that sometimes you need to hear the composer explain what he's doing (assuming there is a valid explanation rather than pretentious hyperbole). At other times, it helps to immerse yourself in the music, especially if there are early works that are more approachable and give you someplace recognizable to start from. A prime example is Messiaen, whose early
Offrandes oubliees I find ravishingly beautiful. When I first heard
Turangalila, I thought it was great fun, and was seduced by the colors and harmonies. His later works were a mystery to me. However, I kept at it, through my appreciation for those initial works I heard, and gradually came to admire a great deal of his output, and truly love several works that would be on my "desert island" classics list. Hearing the composer play some of his music himself many years ago was also inspirational and edifying. I'm not saying anyone should force themselves to endure endless attempts to grasp what truly mystifies, irritates, and/or sickens them, but it's worth giving it a try if you can find a work to start from that has some bit of appeal.
Now, if someone could explain to me what there could possibly be to like about Milton Babbitt's music... ;D
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Perhaps Franz Hünten. Perhaps...
I've only heard a handful of his piano pieces, but they are tedious, at best. There may be a towering masterpiece in manuscript molding away in some steamer trunk, somewhere - but I doubt it.
Can it be that nobody here has ever heard the music of Richard Nanes? I would also submit a couple of symphonies by Alemdar Karamanov, one of which subtitled "Blessed are the Dead" might better be called Blessed Are the Deaf.
Oh dear ;D
A debate about Boulez and discussion about the merits of his music and his audience ;D
I certainly would not characterise my friends who appreciate Boulez as "pretentious snobs" even if I cannot join them in their appreciation. I actually envy those, including clearly some members here, who can get inside the music :)
The only (and definitely final) thing I would add is that as I get older I find that there are scores, no, hundreds of 'unsung composers', living or deceased, in the USA, in Scandinavia, in the Baltic countries, the Balkans, Russia, Japan, etc etc of whom I had never heard and of whose music I was in total ignorance.
In my naivety I considered myself quite knowledgeable as far as 'unsung' symphonists, for example, were concerned. Since joining this site I have discovered the folly of that assumption ;D There is so much music out there yet to be heard. I know that I shall only scratch the surface however many years are left to me. In that time, therefore, I shall go on happily exploring the music written in an idiom I happen to like :)
If therefore you will please excuse me.....I shall pass on devoting the time and effort to explore and attempt to come to terms with the music I don't happen to find attractive or accessible ;D ;D
Heaven knows, I've tried to understand and enjoy the atonalists and serialists. 55 years of concert going. But my ears, my personality, my brain, I don't know what - simply don't tolerate such compositions. It simply makes me nervous and I have to suppress the urge to simply walk out. I can't help it, it's just the way I'm built.
I recently finished The Learning Company 48 lecture DVD course on How to Understand and Appreciate Good Music and while Professor Greenberg makes a very good case for the reasons why these styles evolved and what the composers were trying to say, he gives no clue as to how one can sit down after a stressful day with a pint of good ale and enjoy such music. I have asked dozens of music lovers the same question - and it seems to simply boil down to each of our personalities, our psyches, whatever. Some seem to love it, some can tolerate it and some simply can't.......I fall in the latter catagory. Like Colin, I envy those that do. Apparently I'm missing something. Sadly for me.....
Jerry
Quote from: jerfilm on Friday 03 February 2012, 03:47
Heaven knows, I've tried to understand and enjoy the atonalists and serialists. 55 years of concert going. But my ears, my personality, my brain, I don't know what - simply don't tolerate such compositions. ......
Jerry
Me too, Jerry, but unlike you I don't envy those who do enjoy it. I reckon it's best just to accept that we are all different, and there's always going to be music we prefer and music we can't stand. :)
As to 'deservedly unsung composers', well there are a few in the American music thread but I can't recall exactly who.... and best left that way, I think! ;D
Has this thread survived long enough for thal to now pay up on his £5 wager?? ;D ;D
Quote from: semloh on Friday 03 February 2012, 05:48
Has this thread survived long enough for thal to now pay up on his £5 wager?? ;D ;D
...just what I was thinking. Actually, I think it's going remarkably well. Shows how stimulating this site can be if we are willing to have our minds stretched...
Quote from: isokani on Thursday 02 February 2012, 21:41
Well, lots of other conductors conduct Boulez' music. I know several who do...
And as for "estranging art from its audiences", a rare performance of Pli selon Pli in London was, I am told, made to a full house ...
My problem is not with Boulez the composer or Boulez the conductor, but with Boulez the ideologist - who deems any type of music other than his own as unacceptable and the target for active sabotage. To be honest (and this might be a good topic for a different discussion) I have often been amazed by the amount of intolerance exhibited by musicians towards anyone of a different opinion. Sure, there are similar cases in painting and literature (e.g.), but ideological militancy appears to be especially rife among musicians.
I completely agree, Ilja. I am happy to listen to modernist and atonal music with an open mind, and I like some of it, but it is not the only way to compose. Schoenberg invented his system in order to open up new avenues, not to close down possibilities. Didn't he say 'there is still plenty of good music to be written in C major'?
QuoteCan it be that nobody here has ever heard the music of Richard Nanes?
Sadly, yes. His insipid
Nocturnes of the Celestial Seas is near the top of my list of "undeservedly sung." I keep a copy of the LP to play excerpts for musical friends who may be unaware of this travesty and need a good laugh. Keep in mind that the only reason this composer was "sung" in the first place was that he was wealthy and could afford shameless self-promotion.
For me, Ronald Corp's children's opera "The Ice Mountain" is either deservedly unsung or undeservedly sung, depending on whether Corp is considered unsung. I really enjoyed the Dutton release 'And all the trumpets' and still do, finding it full of drama and beauty, but the opera was insipid and sickly sweet to me, and I can take some pretty sweet stuff
Oddly, Boulez has been conducting a lot of repertoire which one might not normally expect him to do - e.g. Liszt piano concertos (with Barenboim), Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique and Bruckner 8 (which ends in a blaze of C major). Wonder why?
The question is the meaning of the term "deservedly". If we take it literally we might come to the funny conclusion: there are lots of unsung composers/names. They have been so successfully unsung that they were never /have not been so far performed and registered ;)
and here we discuss our musical tatses and habits and that is completly another issue
Who does get the 5 GBP? Or does each of us who has participated? :D :D :D
Jerry
QuoteI am happy to listen to modernist and atonal music with an open mind, and I like some of it, but it is not the only way to compose. Schoenberg invented his system in order to open up new avenues, not to close down possibilities. Didn't he say 'there is still plenty of good music to be written in C major'?
Quite so!
Quote from: Alan Howe on Friday 03 February 2012, 13:56
Oddly, Boulez has been conducting a lot of repertoire which one might not normally expect him to do - e.g. Liszt piano concertos (with Barenboim), Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique and Bruckner 8 (which ends in a blaze of C major). Wonder why?
Yes, he has indeed.....and we should give him credit for that ;D God loves a sinner come to repentence ;D ;D There was a time when Boulez the polemicist did trash romantic composers but he seems to have changed his mind ???
I have his Bruckner 8th and I do think it is a very fine performance.
I'm very amused that this has filled up to 4 pages within just over 24 hours, despite the profession of many that they don't approve of this line of discussion!
Just shows - we're all mature adults here ;)
Quote from: Christopher on Friday 03 February 2012, 17:16
I'm very amused that this has filled up to 4 pages within just over 24 hours, despite the profession of many that they don't approve of this line of discussion!
;D ;D
One keeps getting drawn back by comments made by others :)
(Though the tonal music Schoenberg wrote after that, memory serves, wasn't much centered in C major, but in G major (suite for strings), D minor (organ variations), E-flat minor (completion of his 2nd chamber symphony), G minor (wind band work), etc. Just saying. :)
Hasn't Boulez been conducting Romantic music for quite awhile? Mid or late 1990s certainly- I remember reviews in Fanfare of recordings that also mentioned broadcasts - but maybe well before that too for all I know... (of course, the works most often mentioned- Bruckner and Mahler for instance - are not only Romantic but pivotal to the history of the "Modern tradition"- and not just incidentally so but musically too, I say- and Debussy's Prelude, I agree with Austin, is modern despite being pre-20th century...)
As to deservedly unsung... for starters, the vast majority of dissertation compositions (in any style, "modernist", "eclectic", "neoRomantic" or otherwise.) It's a rare graduation-work that, like Prokofiev's 1st piano concerto (or Myaskovsky's 1st symphony, or etc. ...) deserves to be heard again much, far as I know...
Latvian: every single work by Babbitt (including e.g. his early 2 compositions for piano) or his most characteristic ones?
In any case I still find his late ones to be witty and to draw me in when I'm in the mood, but that all depends. (And when well-played- which includes Robert Taub in piano music and that recent Naxos disc but rather less so the performance of quartet 4 by the Juilliard Quartet.)
Discussion keeps going on whether one likes modern or some sorts of music.
and the question was: what music has been deservedly unsung.
All of us can show cases when we do not know if the stuff deserves to be unsung.
myself as a fan of pf ctos for decades cannot answer for such question.
for example, from dictionaries and books I know that many pf ctos were composed by Polish composers.
let me name only a few: Frieman (two), Wertheim, Wolf.
I never heard them and as far as I know they were never performed or registered in last 60 years (if ever).
Does it mean that they trully deserve oblivion and being simply forgotten?
Many of us wait for the recording of pf cto by Catoir.
Most probably it is going to be the first registration. Has that piece deserved being unsung till today? Why, who decided so?
Quote from: Ilja on Friday 03 February 2012, 12:53
Quote from: isokani on Thursday 02 February 2012, 21:41
Well, lots of other conductors conduct Boulez' music. I know several who do...
And as for "estranging art from its audiences", a rare performance of Pli selon Pli in London was, I am told, made to a full house ...
My problem is not with Boulez the composer or Boulez the conductor, but with Boulez the ideologist - who deems any type of music other than his own as unacceptable and the target for active sabotage. To be honest (and this might be a good topic for a different discussion) I have often been amazed by the amount of intolerance exhibited by musicians towards anyone of a different opinion. Sure, there are similar cases in painting and literature (e.g.), but ideological militancy appears to be especially rife among musicians.
This is a rather strange image of Boulez. He has conducted traditional tonal music for years. He has made a career of it ... and his activities are becoming broader over years: Janacek, Mahler, Liszt, Berlioz etc etc ... He doesn't really conduct much contemporary music. I can think of Ligeti and early Stockhausen, both now dead composers and many of their pieces established classics. Their music is mostly very different from Boulez'.
What music did Boulez sabotage? I am quite intrigued ... and would like to know of some examples.
He was polemical in the 50s. That is nearly three generations ago!
Joseph Street - 2 symphonies, 2 PCs; all published; all very dull indeed! Deservedly unsung IMHO.
I'm thinking Macfarren as a symphony composer, though 'Robin Hood' has been a source of great joy, and I share Wagner's enthusiasm for 'Chevy Chace'. Of course, only one recording each of two symphonies may not be very representative, but someone else mentioned that Prout symphony, which I doubt has had many airings (actually, I quite liked that one)
Quote from: Gareth Vaughan on Friday 03 February 2012, 21:33
Joseph Street - 2 symphonies, 2 PCs; all published; all very dull indeed! Deservedly unsung IMHO.
A generous assessment indeed, but the composer fascinates me.
Surely there must be some skill involved in writing hours of music without the slightest hint of any melodic gift and ability to do anything other than to badly stitch together a string of unigmaginative flights of fancy. Puerile note spinning at its worst.
The 1st PC is in fact so bad that I think it should be recorded.
Thal
I've seen very little by Street- mostly a cello sonata, one or two other things.
Quote from: isokani on Friday 03 February 2012, 19:12
This is a rather strange image of Boulez. He has conducted traditional tonal music for years. He has made a career of it ... and his activities are becoming broader over years: Janacek, Mahler, Liszt, Berlioz etc etc ... He doesn't really conduct much contemporary music. I can think of Ligeti and early Stockhausen, both now dead composers and many of their pieces established classics. Their music is mostly very different from Boulez'.
As I said, little wrong with Boulez as an interpreter, although I find most of his interpretations disappointingly conventional (for one of his background).
Quote
What music did Boulez sabotage? I am quite intrigued ... and would like to know of some examples.
He was polemical in the 50s. That is nearly three generations ago!
That doesn't make it irrelevant, though. As for 'sabotage', I'm mainly speaking of politicizing music to a point where it would become difficult for contemporary composers to compose in any style other than the dodecaphonist/serialist vogue of the day. To be fair, Boulez wasn't the only one guilty of this, and regretfully the trend continues to this day: but he was a particularly vociferous symbol.
Allow me to point to this New Statesman article, which gives a somewhat wider overview: http://www.newstatesman.com/200003200041 (http://www.newstatesman.com/200003200041).
But maybe we ought to close this subject now, since we seem to be of somewhat different persuasion.
Quote from: Alan Howe on Thursday 02 February 2012, 22:50
I find samples of Perosi's music much more attractive than listening to him at length! It's the way his music seems to ramble aimlessly that simply bores me beyond endurance. Apologies!
Very well said, Alan. I've bought Perosi's PC and as a result of a few listens I can only second your opinion. Why does Perosi need so much time to say what he wants? And it sounds so sluggish.