What I said was (emphasis added):

Moreover, often the musicians who choose to specialise in the works of forgotten composers are themselves not generally in the first ranks of musical talent, despite what their supporters may say. These musicians often find "forgotten composers" merely to find themselves a market (any market!).

I think it will be seen that I qualified my remarks, and I clearly wasn't laying down any cast-iron laws. I was not saying they are no good. In any event, the counter-argument is not valid because the particular pianists referred do not specialise in forgotten composers. They include some of the "forgotten" composers as part of a wider repertoire which includes the more well-known composers as well. Indeed, this point was admitted. This doesn't constitute "specialise" in my book. "Specialise" means "devote oneself to a particular branch of a profession or discipline." [Pocket Oxford Dictionary] I certainly meant "devote". In fact, I wrote it most carefully, as I usually do with most of the posts I place on this Forum.

The other argument is that well-known composers produced works that are largely forgotten these days, with the implication that this further demonstrates that the public must be ignorant about classical music. On the contrary, this only shows that for most people the point of satiety has been reached before getting down as far as these works. To them, a lot of this material starts to get bland and boring after a while, and they can’t take any more. It doesn’t mean these people are ignorant. They are simply not as keen as some enthusiasts, who may want to examine every nook and cranny.



Topaz

Sure, the general public is very clever and expert. For example,they know so much of the
chamber music of Mendelssohn,that they are tired and bored of it, and justly reject to hear any other work from him, even unknown,because all should be the same boring crap.
Fine reasoning Implies that any unknown or not popular and in the "market" piece of any
famous composer is irrelevant,reiterative and worthless, and the general public,in his
infitite wisdom, know that.

Oisfetz: I have to agree with you on your recommendations concerning various 19th C chamber works such as Brahms piano quartets. Our tastes seem very close in this area. I think there are at least one or two others here who agree with such choices. I have the Rubinstein/Guarneri set, Ops 25, 26, 60 and am playing them through now as I type this. What more could anyone want? Really excellent pieces. They put to shame vasts amount of other material, especially from later composers. They are beautifully crafted, and have an elegance and charm that others struggle to match.

I hope you understand that, if I could, I would waive a wand and divert the attention of other classical fans away from other areas towards these great masters. But no such wand exists, and public opinion is what it is. I agree with you that public opinion may not be very sophisticated. However, I have given up trying to persuade people to become more interested in classical music, or trying to divert the attention of classical fans away from music I consider inferior. I used to try but I find it's a waste of time. It just leads to squabbles.

Your radio station sounds very interesting. If you played 19th C chamber music all day, I'd be tuned in and a strong supporter if I lived in Buenos Aires. Which 19th C composers would you say are the most popular among your audience, and do you have any idea of the age profile?



Topaz

Polls are surely more then trifling 'popularity': If we can assume the composers that are most played are simply more 'popular' and nothing more, then I would agree with you; but I'm afraid that isn't the case.

[b]Topaz:[b] My program goes sundays 7.30 to 9.00 pm GMT only. Usualy I pass 3 works;
first for a unknown or forgotten composer, like Arkady Fillipenko, Desire Paque, Heinrich
Kaminsky,Hermann Scherchen, Lyapunov, Eduard Franck.. Second, an unknown or forgoten piece by soma famous, like Saint-Saéns SQ and piano trios, Dvorak quartets or quintets,
Tchaikovsky Great piano sonata op.37, Godowsky Pasacaglia, Albeniz unknown works...
Third, a famous piece but on rare historical versions,like Brahm's piano quartets by Rubinstein with Pro-Arte, and Serkin with Busch SQ.,Shosta.first v.c.live by Oistrakh-Mitropoulos,etc. People like second and third part. First, often left them disconcerted. After all, are first radio ever!. How many had heard Hermann Scherchen SQ op.1???

Oisfetz: When you say that the audience is "disconcerted" by music of unknown or forgotten composers, do you mean they don't like the music, or don't like the fact that this music is forgotten? What type of music is played during the rest of the week?

Linz: Sorry but I am not clear I understand the point you are making.

All I'm am trying to say Topaz, is that I believe their is more to human generalities artistically speaking. If I was to say Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven are more popular and that is all their is to it. I would first be drawn to the question of exactly why that was. Are their things within their music which deserve greater attention. The fact remains that it is quite a simplistic phenomena to merely say 'popular' without trying to discern as to why that is so. After all, though our logic and rationalist differ from person to person as freedom allows; I, unlike some 'existentialist', believe there is a common thread that attracts us to the ultimate concept of 'artistic genius': Whether people are to rapped up in their own opinions to realize this, only serves to lessen their effectiveness toward others.

What I mean is that they feel uncertain when the hear a work first time in their life, and
sometimes they don't understand it. In particular when the piece is something
rather hard, like Tischenko's second v.c., a Ropartz cello sonata or the huge violin sonata
by Josef Wieniawsky. My program is the only one in the country that transmit complete
rare pieces. All the rest is standard classical repertory. And nobody ever pass chamber and
violin pieces on rare historical versions. Nobody.

Topaz, Re your post #42. I will reflect where and whenever I choose without an invitation or prompting from anyone even those that are obviously so very knowledgably.

I have been involved in the “Market” [manufacturing, promoting, servicing and even retailing] for 30 yrs+ so have no trouble understanding how it works.
I can see that my suggestion of adding objectivity when claiming “Best status” would raise difficulties and traps, so I will let the matter rest.
0000000000000000

Regarding new/forgotten or seldom performed works, well I enjoy listening to new works, most of the time it is hard work but the results can be wonderfully satisfying as well as downright terrible at times, I do find a lot depends on what mood you are in at the time, and I thank those that make these works available for us to hear, it must be soul destroying to you when reading some of the comments posted here,

Also I detect just a hint of ad hom creeping into some postings, I do hope that this will not become a common occurrence, it is so easy to be polite.

Oisfetz, Thank you for mentioning Brahms Piano Qt, I have this performed by ‘Domus’ what splendid rhythms, it also has a Piano Qt movement by Mahler, Not a well known work.

I was replying to something written early in the discussion about popularity and polls being inaccurate. By the way, considering how much effort Tchaikovsky put into his 6th symphony, and how 'original' yet 'founded' the work is, it is probably my favorite work of him. Many other works though are more 'tuneful', as he was perhaps the greatest melodic composer.

You have to write it Wieniawski, Y is pronounced "uh" in polish. (I'm learning polish, just wanted to show my skills ).

the only Tchaikowsky pieces I often listen are Rococo Variations

OK, Josef Wieniawski. Professional pianist,nobody knows or remember him,except collectors
of rarities like me. Funny that Josef who was a pianist wrote a big violin sonata, and Henrik
a great violinist and violist,didn't. Surely Josef wrote the sonata for Henrik. But Henrik wasn´t
a pianist,didn't know the piano, and wisely didn't write nothing for it. Josef had some very
lyiric and romantic piano pieces, not easy to play.

There are many examples of performers who excel both in forgotten and known masterpieces (once Bach's works were forgotten, but they were still masterpieces, so I think the concept "forgotten masterpiece" isn't complete nonsense), Stephen Hough, Musica Antiqua Köln and Heinz Holliger for an example.
I think that performers who only view and perform known pieces will gain narrower perspective on music and music-history than the performers of forgotten music (I am talking only about professional musicians, meaning that the performers of forgotten music have also studied the masterpieces known as "standards" in music schools world-wide, i.e. the popular ones).


And on the original sub-topic (Manfred Symphony): I disagree about this symphony being "trash". There are many memorable themes, like the heavily tragic and dramatic theme early in the first movement. The dark tones that distinguish the sixth from the other five can be heard most clearly in this one. But the heavy, dark atmosphere of the piece prevents a great flow of beautiful melodies, what makes the other symphonies so great. I think the numbered symphonies outshine this one, but it is certainly not a trash!

Re the above post, I have already answered this. See post 46. Stephen Hough and Heinz Holliger do not specialise in forgotten composers, so the observations are irrelevant.

As for the comment about "trash", it was Bernstein's: one of the the USA's foremost conductors.

I can't go along with the notion that "once a masterpice always a masterpiece". Tastes and fashions change. Try telling the general public they should start buying von Weber works galore, merely because he was once very highly rated (back in the 19th C).

A masterpiece is not a masterpiece if nobody wants it any more. It is an ex-masterpiece or a de-ceased masterpiece. It's just like a movie star who's gone out of fashion. Or a defunct design of motor car, or whatever. Merely because they were once famous doesn't mean they necessarily have any value today.

IMO, Manfred is at the same level that his 6th.s. I don't care a d...thing if it isn't famous or
if nobody listen to it anymore. I just love it.