Albie Cabrera wrote:

>How DO people do this?? I know for sure it ain't in me...  Ravel and
>Debussy are central to my interests in classical music as the sun is to
>the center of our solar system (well, maybe I'll give that honored place
>to Mahler and Bruckner;-)...  then Webern and Boulez

Whatever Albies personal preferences may be, Boulez is recognized both as
a conductor and as a composer.

But what about Artur Schnabel?

While he has long been recognized as *the* interpreter of Beethoven, Mozart
and Schubert, his compositions are almost never heard.  While I usually get
in trouble characterizing certain works as atonal, I'll go out on a limb
and say that, to me the composition of his that I've heard (one string
quartet) is far less tonal than the works he performs.  An indication of
his compositional preferences may be found in some of the cadenzas he's
written for Mozart concertos (Nos.  21 & 24).

Why are Schnabel's compositions heard less frequently in proportion to
his performances than the compositions of Boulez? Are they inferior
compositions? If so, can somebody explain why?

Walter Meyer