dbcrow's OP from other thread...
'Max Reger has been my discovery of the year. His organ music was the gateway for other genres, and I find his orchestral, chamber, and, especially, choral music to be outstanding and original. You gotta love any composer who's been characterized (and vilified) as a hopelessly retrospective Bach imitator who, at the same time, anticipated Hindemith; a true Brahmsian child of German Romanticism; and a daring, Lisztian/Wagnerian chromaticist who would sire Viennese atonalism.
I understand that his music was (is?) out of fashion among audience and critics alike. Something about "torturous" and "meandering" harmonic structures, endless fugue and counterpoint, etc.
Where do Talk Classical members stand on Reger? Can somebody help me understand his critical fortunes? Are they now waxing? It may simply be that I don't know enough about music to dislike Reger!'
___________________________
The music of Max Reger has probably provided the biggest u-turn in my classical listening so far. I had a few orchestral and chamber works by him and although I could listen to them I initially thought them stodgy, anachronistic and seemingly unable to escape the shackles of Brahms. Perhaps I also had too many preconceptions due to his unfashionable penchant for fugal writing at a time when composers such as Ives, Skryabin and Schoenberg were going down completely different paths.
Then suddenly something happened and I totally warmed to those very same compositions which led to me taking the plunge and buying an excellent 7-disc set on Berlin Classics of nearly all of his orchestral works. For stodgy/anachronistic/ersatz Brahms read sturdy but logical/taking some long-established forms to their absolute limit/with a voice of its own.
It's mind-boggling how many works he might have composed in total had he lived another 25 years (I'm sure he was biding his time in Brahmsian fashion before tackling the symphony), but what is tantalising is how his style would have evolved had he made it into the 1920s.