Donald Satz wrote:

>Rachmaninov's place among "late-romantic" composers is very secure.
>I think he's in a similar bracket to Strauss and Mahler,

Do you think so? I've always seen Rachmaninov as a kind of anachronistic
fellow, perhaps as the guy who extended Tchaikovsky's basic aesthetic with
heavy doses of Chopin (or vice versa) into the 20th century, whereas I saw
in Strauss and Mahler proponents of a German tradition who expanded upon
the developments of Wagner.  Part of the reason for these feelings is that
Rachmaninov was one of the first few composers I really got enthusiastic
about after getting into Classical music (Chopin being the impetus for my
initial interest), and I didn't feel ready to tackle Strauss or Mahler for
another two years after that.

Strauss (R, that is) and Mahler don't really occupy comparable positions
either in the minds of the general public or the general concert-going
public to Rachmaninov, do they? What have other people experienced?

--everitt clark
[log in to unmask]