I find it interesting, considering his overall accepted fame, that little mention is made of Haydn on this forum compared to other composers.
Certainly if one were to write a history of Western art music, Haydn would get a bigger "centerfold" than the oft-discussed-here Mahler, Sibelius, etc. Nothing against the latter, certainly, but I found it interesting that in the past I had to explicitly inquire as to where to start with Haydn, whereas there is a veritable bounty of input on many other composers.
In my time away from the forum, I picked up a selection of Haydn's symphonies and string quartets, and (as silly as this may sound) was actually surprised at its quality. Beautiful, genius even.
Now, like most of you, I wouldn't say he is my favorite composer, but I felt like giving him some props. Feel free to join me in giving him a "thumbs-up"--or even some other finger (possibly in some other direction) if you desire.
Certainly if one were to write a history of Western art music, Haydn would get a bigger "centerfold" than the oft-discussed-here Mahler, Sibelius, etc. Nothing against the latter, certainly, but I found it interesting that in the past I had to explicitly inquire as to where to start with Haydn, whereas there is a veritable bounty of input on many other composers.
In my time away from the forum, I picked up a selection of Haydn's symphonies and string quartets, and (as silly as this may sound) was actually surprised at its quality. Beautiful, genius even.
Now, like most of you, I wouldn't say he is my favorite composer, but I felt like giving him some props. Feel free to join me in giving him a "thumbs-up"--or even some other finger (possibly in some other direction) if you desire.