Teleman

Hi Carl,

> >Yes, I could believe that Bach was a century or so ahead
> >of some of his contemporaries such as say Teleman for chromaticism,

> I don't know why Telemann is so often derided. He is in my mind
> a composer of incredible importance who wrote some of the best
> chamber music ever, who was more prolific than Vivaldi plus the
> average quality of the works is much higher.

Sorry if I gave that impression. No derision intended at
all. He is one of my favourite composers, next favourite
after Jacob van Eyck who is my absolute most favourite
of all. (Because I play recorder of course, and so
enjoy playing his music, totally biased).

I don't subscribe to the view that more modern means
better (or worse), so ahead of his time doesn't mean better,
only more modern.

Robert

>Hi Carl,
>
>> >Yes, I could believe that Bach was a century or so ahead
>> >of some of his contemporaries such as say Teleman for
>> >chromaticism,
>
>> I don't know why Telemann is so often derided. He is in my mind
>> a composer of incredible importance who wrote some of the best
>> chamber music ever, who was more prolific than Vivaldi plus the
>> average quality of the works is much higher.
>
>Sorry if I gave that impression. No derision intended at
>all. He is one of my favourite composers, next favourite
>after Jacob van Eyck who is my absolute most favourite
>of all. (Because I play recorder of course, and so
>enjoy playing his music, totally biased).

Sorry, I was skirting the line between the 'open-letter interface'
and the 'everyone's reading this' interface; the derision comes
from another thread.

Too, I've heard it out and about in the biz. Vivaldi is more
derided in this respect I suppose, haunted by the -- was it
Stravinsky's? -- "cookie cutter" label.

>I don't subscribe to the view that more modern means
>better (or worse), so ahead of his time doesn't mean better,
>only more modern.

Agreed.

-Carl