The 20 Worst Composers

[Aegimius]

These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not
necessarily in order), along with the reasons why:

1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over

2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.

3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.

4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless

5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.

6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).

7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven

8) Schoenberg - enough said

9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.

10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian

11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms

12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling

13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism

14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music

15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad

16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.

17)John Field - boring, idiotic music

18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth

19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)

20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

[Allen]

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not

Won't be needing to see any more of your posts. Goodbye.
By the way, I'm sure that no one in this group, including you, has ever
heard or heard of the 20 worst composers.
Allen

[Pete Granzeau]

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not
1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over
2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.
3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.
4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless
5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.
6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).
7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven
8) Schoenberg - enough said
9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.
10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian
11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms
12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling
13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism
14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music
15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad
16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.
17)John Field - boring, idiotic music
18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth
19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)
20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

Nah. These are just the 20 composers of whom you know that you most
don't like.

The 20 worst composers are all so justifiably obscure that you never
heard of any of them.

[Brendan R. Wehrung]

Post by Pete Granzeau

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not
1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over
2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.
3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.
4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless
5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.
6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).
7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven
8) Schoenberg - enough said
9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.
10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian
11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms
12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling
13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism
14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music
15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad
16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.
17)John Field - boring, idiotic music
18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth
19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)
20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

Nah. These are just the 20 composers of whom you know that you most
don't like.
The 20 worst composers are all so justifiably obscure that you never
heard of any of them.

Jemkins?
Rutter?
Nanes?

Brendan

[Julio Laredo]

Name one composer who never stole.

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not
1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over
2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.
3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.
4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless
5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.
6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).
7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven
8) Schoenberg - enough said
9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.
10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian
11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms
12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling
13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism
14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music
15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad
16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.
17)John Field - boring, idiotic music
18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth
19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)
20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

[Nicolai P. Zwar]

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not

LOL! You don't go out much, do you?

Post by Aegimius
1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over
2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.
3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.
4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless
5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.
6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).
7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven
8) Schoenberg - enough said
9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.
10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian
11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms
12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling
13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism
14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music
15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad
16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.
17)John Field - boring, idiotic music
18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth
19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)
20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

[Aegimius]

this board attracts way too many britney speers fans it is terrible.
trying to educate the britney speers fans about classical music is like
trying to teach a rock to play fetch.

[Matthew Fields]

Post by Aegimius
this board attracts way too many britney speers fans it is terrible.
trying to educate the britney speers fans about classical music is like
trying to teach a rock to play fetch.

But the latter doesn't annoy the rock.

[Sacqueboutier]

Post by Aegimius
this board attracts way too many britney speers fans it is terrible.
trying to educate the britney speers fans about classical music is like
trying to teach a rock to play fetch.

Physician, heal thyself.

[Julio Laredo]

I don't see Reger. He made the Guinness Book of worst composer of all time.

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not
1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over
2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.
3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.
4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless
5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.
6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).
7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven
8) Schoenberg - enough said
9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.
10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian
11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms
12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling
13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism
14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music
15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad
16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.
17)John Field - boring, idiotic music
18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth
19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)
20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

[Aegimius]

Reger wasn't all that bad. He was more or less a mediocre composer but
had his brilliantly shinning moments. Hindemith mysteriously stole the
spotlight from Reger even though Reger's counterpoint is more
thoughtfully used. Reger's music has more power and spirit to it, even
though Hindemith was more "modern". Music historians and critics often
do not like those composers who do not keep up with the times, as if
they are required to. They think all good composers should follow along
in the inevitable path of supposed musical "progress". So Reger wasn't
anymore "advanced" than Brahms. It beats being "modern" for modernism's
sake. I'm all for artistic progress, but to use them as tools with good
intentions, and good taste, not to be used as "modernist" gimmicks and
ornaments like the serialists or the Stravinsky imitators. They only
sound awkward and contrived when abused like that, when used by
composers who have little understanding of what the new tools of
expression really mean.

[Poldie]

Post by Aegimius
It beats being "modern" for modernism's
sake. I'm all for artistic progress, but to use them as tools with good
intentions, and good taste, not to be used as "modernist" gimmicks and
ornaments like the serialists or the Stravinsky imitators.

Given that Stravinsky was in later years to all intents and purposes as
serialist, it looks as if that sentence is something of a paradox!

[b***@yahoo.com]

Post by Aegimius
Music historians and critics often
do not like those composers who do not keep up with the times, as if
they are required to. They think all good composers should follow along
in the inevitable path of supposed musical "progress".

Please provide specific examples, such as names and quotes, for this
assertion.

Post by Aegimius
I'm all for artistic progress, but to use them as tools with good
intentions, and good taste, not to be used as "modernist" gimmicks and
ornaments like the serialists or the Stravinsky imitators.

How do you know such composers did not use their "tools" with good
intention? Were they, say, using them to rob banks or something?

Post by Aegimius
They only
sound awkward and contrived when abused like that,

What constitutes "abuse of tools?"

Post by Aegimius
when used by
composers who have little understanding of what the new tools of
expression really mean.

And what do these "new tools of expression" really mean?

[DZ]

Post by Aegimius
Reger wasn't all that bad. He was more or less a mediocre composer
but had his brilliantly shinning moments. Hindemith mysteriously
stole the spotlight from Reger even though Reger's counterpoint is
more thoughtfully used. Reger's music has more power and spirit to
it, even though Hindemith was more "modern".

When I was about 15, I once listened to Hindemith on the radio. It was
back in USSR. I never heard his name before. Next day I went to the
store and bought Ludus Tonalis on LP, played by Svetlana Navasardyan.
I knew right away that whoever this composer is, he is a genius.

DZ

[Dottlebreath]

Post by DZ
When I was about 15, I once listened to Hindemith on the radio. It was
back in USSR. I never heard his name before. Next day I went to the
store and bought Ludus Tonalis on LP, played by Svetlana Navasardyan.
I knew right away that whoever this composer is, he is a genius.
DZ

Bless you. I thought I was the only one who liked Ludus Tonalis.

[Sacqueboutier]

Post by Aegimius
Reger wasn't all that bad. He was more or less a mediocre composer but
had his brilliantly shinning moments. Hindemith mysteriously stole the
spotlight from Reger even though Reger's counterpoint is more
thoughtfully used. Reger's music has more power and spirit to it, even
though Hindemith was more "modern". Music historians and critics often
do not like those composers who do not keep up with the times, as if
they are required to. They think all good composers should follow along
in the inevitable path of supposed musical "progress". So Reger wasn't
anymore "advanced" than Brahms. It beats being "modern" for modernism's
sake. I'm all for artistic progress, but to use them as tools with good
intentions, and good taste, not to be used as "modernist" gimmicks and
ornaments like the serialists or the Stravinsky imitators. They only
sound awkward and contrived when abused like that, when used by
composers who have little understanding of what the new tools of
expression really mean.

You really think that Reger was better than any of the 20 on your list?

As you say regarding Schoenberg, "enough said".

[Terry Simmons]

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not
1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over
2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.
3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.
4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless
5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.
6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).
7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven
8) Schoenberg - enough said
9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.
10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian
11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms
12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling
13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism
14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music
15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad
16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.
17)John Field - boring, idiotic music
18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth
19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)
20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

Congratulations on a fine effort! Now can we have your list of the 20 best, with
your reasons?

[Michael Haslam]

Post by Terry Simmons

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not

Congratulations on a fine effort! Now can we have your list of the 20
best, with your reasons?

And after that perhaps a link to some of your own music (scores or
audio) so we can decide your ranking.

[Matthew Fields]

Post by Terry Simmons

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not
1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over
2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.
3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.
4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless
5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.
6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).
7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven
8) Schoenberg - enough said
9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.
10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian
11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms
12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling
13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism
14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music
15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad
16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.
17)John Field - boring, idiotic music
18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth
19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)
20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

Congratulations on a fine effort! Now can we have your list of the 20 best, with
your reasons?
--
Cheers!
Terry

Obviously it'd be the same 20 composers, with the reasons simply
given in a different order! (see Horoscope)

[Chris Cathcart]

Post by Matthew Fields

Post by Terry Simmons
Congratulations on a fine effort! Now can we have your list of the 20 best, with
your reasons?
--
Cheers!
Terry

Obviously it'd be the same 20 composers, with the reasons simply
given in a different order! (see Horoscope)

More like, he's giving a top-20 list of composers of major repute that
he doesn't like. Obviously his post generates no interest if it's all
a bunch of shitty composers that no one has heard of.

[Matthew Fields]

Post by Chris Cathcart

Post by Matthew Fields

Post by Terry Simmons
Congratulations on a fine effort! Now can we have your list of the 20 best, with
your reasons?
--
Cheers!
Terry

Obviously it'd be the same 20 composers, with the reasons simply
given in a different order! (see Horoscope)

More like, he's giving a top-20 list of composers of major repute that
he doesn't like. Obviously his post generates no interest if it's all
a bunch of shitty composers that no one has heard of.

Unless it's really really funny.
I mean, how many essays about PDQ Bach can one take at a time?

[Aegimius]

I know so many will disagree but I believe that Camille Saint-Saens is
the #1 Greatest composer.

1)Camille Saint-Saens
2)JS Bach
3)Beethoven
4)Mozart
5)Brahms
6)Stravinsky
7)Prokofiev
8)Josquin Deprez
9)Debussy
10)Chopin
11)Wagner
12)Schubert
13)Shostakovich
14)Palestrina
15)Ravel
16)Schumann
17)Scriabin
18)Berlioz
19)Monteverdi
20)Janacek

I'd show you my compositions but they aren't on my computer.

[Richard]

... I believe that Camille Saint-Saens is
the #1 Greatest composer.

Hmm, ... Saint-Saens - the #1 Greatest composer; Haydn - Was technically
good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense. No one can quarrel with that, can one????????????????

[Dottlebreath]

So, according to you, Handel stole from other composers and Bach
didn't? Ravel never re-orchestrated, transcribed or "cleaned up"
anything?

[Allen]

Post by Dottlebreath
So, according to you, Handel stole from other composers and Bach
didn't? Ravel never re-orchestrated, transcribed or "cleaned up"
anything?

My guess would be that he has heard of Bach, but Ravel may be a new name
to him. I blocked him after that first idiotic post, so I don't what, if
anything, he has had to say since then.
Allen

[Aegimius]

Handel usually passed off the works of others as his own. Ravel, Bach,
Beethoven Mozart, and Haydn were at least honest about the sources of
their material if they were not original.

[Dottlebreath]

Then this thread is not about compositional skills but rather about
"honesty?" Those are two different things.

[Matthew Fields]

Post by Dottlebreath
Then this thread is not about compositional skills but rather about
"honesty?" Those are two different things.

Carlo Gesualdo di Venosa... composer, murdered his wife on mere
suspicion of infidelity. Does that have any part the OP's assessment
of his standing as a composer?

[Bullwinkle Moose]

It's obvious you don't know anything about music.

Post by Aegimius
These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst composers(not
1)Vivaldi - rewrote the same material over and over and over
2) Haydn - Was technically good, but lacked imagination and good
melodic sense.
3) Tchaikovsky - Poor orchestration, couldn't develop ideas fully, bad
sense of structure.
4)Handel - Repeatedly stole ideas from dozens of composers, and not
very imaginative regardless
5)Johann Straus - Boring, too simplistic and lacks depth.
6)Mendelssohn - Excellent command of the music language, unfortunately
uninspired and very dull(except for the Octet and violin concerto).
7)Sibelius - Bad sense of musical structure, stole from Borodin,
Tchaikovsky, Mahler and Beethoven
8) Schoenberg - enough said
9)Vaughan Williams - Very lacking in imagination, boring, no flair.
10)Hindemith - Boring, pseudo-bachian
11)Cesar Franck - Too sweet, sacharine, syrupy and dull at times. Not
good with musical forms
12)Copland - Very very boring, no feeling
13)Hummel - Uninspired anachronism
14) Mikhail Glinka - Poor understanding of music
15) Glazunov - bad bad bad bad
16)Grieg - Childishly simply melodies with out feeling or inspiration.
Poor orchestration.
17)John Field - boring, idiotic music
18)Charlves Ives - Poor orchestration, dull, no depth
19) Alban Berg - (see Schoenberg)
20)Anton Webern (see Schoenberg).

[John K. Graham]

Aegimus wrote: "These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst
composers(not necessarily in order), along with the reasons why: "

I can't help but laugh. This room is FULL of atonalists and
inclusivists, so naturally they're going to be dismissive of your list.
You have as much right to express your own views as they have to
declaim them, however, and I certainly got a good belly laugh out of
some of your assessments. I agree with several of them, yet these are
the ones I must disagree with: (1) Vivaldi - excellent use of variation
technique and primarily a writer for strings; (3) Tchaikovsky - formal
elements consistent with poetic experiments of his day, even if a bit
of his basic material seems trite; (7) Sibelius - formal understanding
based upon Finnish poetic traditions (such as Tchaikovsky), and
brilliant orchestrator; (9) Vaughn-Williams - able composer in modal
forms and experimenter with modal parallelism; (14) Glinka - broke free
of the Orthadox constraints upon music in early 19th century; and (18)
Ives - made fantastic strides in the understanding of polyrhythms and
multi-modality, saw dissonance as unthreatening and of colorful
interest.

All the rest I can generally agree with. I wonder how one might fashion
a list of the top twenty TALENTED composers?

[Matthew Fields]

Post by John K. Graham
Aegimus wrote: "These are the composers I believe are the 20 worst
composers(not necessarily in order), along with the reasons why: "
I can't help but laugh. This room is FULL of atonalists and
inclusivists, so naturally they're going to be dismissive of your list.
You have as much right to express your own views as they have to
declaim them, however, and I certainly got a good belly laugh out of
some of your assessments. I agree with several of them, yet these are
the ones I must disagree with: (1) Vivaldi - excellent use of variation
technique and primarily a writer for strings; (3) Tchaikovsky - formal
elements consistent with poetic experiments of his day, even if a bit
of his basic material seems trite; (7) Sibelius - formal understanding
based upon Finnish poetic traditions (such as Tchaikovsky), and
brilliant orchestrator; (9) Vaughn-Williams - able composer in modal
forms and experimenter with modal parallelism; (14) Glinka - broke free
of the Orthadox constraints upon music in early 19th century; and (18)
Ives - made fantastic strides in the understanding of polyrhythms and
multi-modality, saw dissonance as unthreatening and of colorful
interest.
All the rest I can generally agree with. I wonder how one might fashion
a list of the top twenty TALENTED composers?

Start with their body measurements....

[Aegimius]

I'm glad someone finally got the joke. I don't think there are any 20
"worst" composers. But, I think my wacky approach could spark an
interesting debate, as well as lead me to certain works missing in my
collection. Only a few of the composers on the list are ones I find
boring, but I wouldn't call them "bad", they simply don't interest
me(Johann Strauss and Hummel for instance). Saint-Saens is okay, I was
joking when I said he was the greatest of all time. Maybe he is too
inhibited but rarely boring. Too many music scholars use Beethoven,
without question one of the greatest, as a yardstick to measure other
composers, which explains Tchaikovsky's "poor" orchestration. Such
comparisons are rarely helpful. Are you familiar with Glazonov and
Glinka's works? I feel that the Russians enriched the Classical
tradition in a way that no one else could have.