Charles Dalmas:

>Well, I have a couple.  First off, Louis Spohr (or Ludwig, auf Deutsch).
>
>This genius actually compared Beethoven to Cow Manure.  He thought of
>himself as the greatest composer of the early 18th century.  Speaking
>as a clarinet player, I can say that his four concertos are specious and
>superficial.  All four put together have less good music in them than one
>movement of the Beethoven Opus 11 Trio for Clarinet, Cello, and Piano.
>The rest of his work (that which I have heard) is equally dull and
>uninteresting.

Gee, I love a lot of Spohr.  Yeah, he was wrong about Beethoven, but it's
the music that counts, not his opinions.  The symphonies aren't a patch
on Beethoven's, Mendelssohn's, or Schumann's, but his chamber music is
at least interesting.  At his best, he's also a very quirky harmonist.

>Secondly, Minimalist Composers, with the exception of Terry Riley, who
>was at least original.  Seriously, how much brain power does it take to
>write the same one measure motif 500 times in a row?

It takes a lot of brain power to realize that repeating the measure might
be interesting if done right.  Many of the greatest inspirations have come
about through the realization that something considered not worth doing
might indeed be worth doing.  But, then again, I don't know whom you're
talking about.  I happen to find Adams and Reich wonderful and many of the
"holy minimalists" of the Baltic (like Paert, Tormis, and Gorecki) at least
interesting.  Of course, none of these guys do what you describe as
minimalist.

Steve Schwartz