From: David Royko
In response to a posting about Beethoven’s Triple Concerto, where it was said:
>Nobody seems to have a high opinion of it
I finally accepted, years ago, that I have no taste -- I really like (yep, just simply enjoy hearing) many of the pieces that are considered sub-par (I also like many of the superduper masterpieces too--most of them, actually, but what do I know?). The triple concerto's one of them.
So, somebody has a high (or at least, not low) opinion of it -- me! I also love Dvorak's 3rd, Bruckner's double-zeeero, oh, the list stretches on and on. Martinu and Sibelius used to be low-class too, many moons ago in my student days when I secretly loved them, but not no more -- they've graduated to being high-class composers. So I might be only middle-brow now.
But Beethoven's triple might keep my brow low. Damn Ludwig. And I still listen to (and enjoy!) Rostropovich/Oistrakh/Richter/Herbie, which, I'm guessing, really seals it.
In response to me, it was said:
>I love all that low-class stuff too, including the
>Beethoven concerto for piano trio and orchestra!
Heathens unite. I think many of the "masterpieces" of a century ago that have vanished from concert stages were the kinds of pieces that could be enjoyed on first or second hearing, and people loved 'em, but since recordings came along, easy access and repeated hearings did them in.
Former war-horse (now practically an obscurity) that I'm not supposed to love anymore (but I do): Enescu's Romanian Rhapsody (the more famous of the two). And not quite as obscure yet, Respighi's Pines of Rome -- heck, all three of his low-down, dirty Romes.
Then from another poster, regarding the Beethoven Triple:
>It's a terrible piece.
See? Like I said, I ain't got no taste.