John Detwiler wrote:

>In fact, I think there's much less difference between the famous
>composers and the insignificant than is usually thought.  Perhaps
>the main difference is consistency, I don't know.

I think "consistency" is more a measure of excellence than reputation.
There are quite a few composers who have a "name" based on just one or two
compositions, which is not to say that their other works are not good or
not as good as the famous work.

Famous and best are different animals, although the composers I would stand
up for at all costs(Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, and Handel) are definitely
famous.  What makes those four the best is that they are the only classical
composers who blow me away at one moment, then before I have recovered, do
it again at an even higher level.  How do they do that? I just marvel at
it.  In the world of rock music, only Led Zepplin, Bob Dylan, Pink Floyd,
Traffic, and Richard Thompson did that to me.  Nostalgia's okay as long as
it's not overdone.

I do agree with John that the "differences" are often exaggerated.  But,
once a person has that "famous" tag, it sticks like glue regardless of
subsequent events.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]