Messages

Apologies. I'm afraid I am very dismissive of Hovhaness' music. ... all of Hovhaness' music sounds more or less the same - rather like a half-decent film score, with very little structural, harmonic or thematic integrity. It is floss, pure and simple. I truly believe that, in this case, the composer has spread himself (or rather, his mediocre talant) far too thinly.

Much of it (yes there are 400 works I believe) is not "floss" and Hovhaness's music certainly DOESN'T all sound "more or less the same".  I've been re-discovering his music of late, and I cannot think of a SINGLE American composer whose music is more DIVERSE.  For example, if you hear symphonies 9, 10 and 11, you could be forgiven for thinking they were by three different composers - you can't say that about many symphonists!  9 sounds folkish, 10 sounds ethnic Indian, and 11 is steeped in a sort of Sibelius/Vaughan Williams-like romanticism.

If he had written, say a quarter (or even less) of the number of works he did, maybe (just maybe) there would be at least one memorable or truly remarkable piece. As it stands, I have to confess to having yet to find anything that deserves repeated listening.

I agree he wrote too much, which watered down the overall quality.  But that "memorable or truly remarkable piece" for many is certainly Mysterious Mountain (Symphony #2) which must have been recorded by at least 6 of our major orchestras (under such notables as Fritz Reiner, John Williams, Andrew Litton, Gerard Schwarz, etc).  I dont think such conductors would have gone near "floss" 

Can I recommend giving Mysterious Mountain serious listening - it seems to mesmerize a lot of people, and with just cause.  His xylophone concerto Fantasy on Japanese Woodprints is also very attractive, if more lightweight.