Shostakovich recalled that Glazunov kept his score library in perfectly alphabetical order except for the letter "I", under which he found a wide variety of names seemingly grouped together at random. When Shostakovich asked why all these people were filed under "I', Glazunov replied, "Because they are all Insignificant composers".

Albinoni wrote some wonderful concertos, especially his Op 9 collection. Pachelbel ain't Bach but he did compose some very good organ music.

Your mind must be a whirling Dervish of ideas. How you come up with this content is a beauty to behold.

Thank you, Dave, what a fun, enjoyable excercize. Just for the record, I'm all about Thalberg! I have to confess that I love his opera paraphrases.

I adore Kozeluch’s sinfonie concertante for piano, mandolin trumpet and double bass. Hard to come up with a wackier combo.

I'd go for Gliere over Kabalevsky because, of the works I've heard, Gliere's posess the greater warmth. His duets for strings are masterly and very rewarding listening.

As several have already noted, in the Pachelbel-Albinoni duel, Pachelbel wins because at least he composed his Canon, while Albinoni’s Adagio is now considered a 20th-century neo-Baroque fabrication. Besides that, though, Pachelbel‘s Canon is merely the tip of a musical iceberg, so to speak, that stands out for its tunefulness, expressiveness, and delightful listenablity. See, for example, the Hexachordum Apolloninis, the Musicalische Ergötzung, and the large body of powerful works for organ (the soulful Ciaccona in d minor!). I agree that Pachelbel isn’t first-rank in the grand scheme of things , but there’s plenty worth exploring beyond the overplayed Canon.

Nice idea, Dave. I’m somewhat gratified that I don’t listen to many mediocre composers so can only comment on a few. Albinoni v Pachelbel. Like others I’d go for Pachelbel, because his organ music is very high quality and had some influence in Germany, including on Bach. Albinoni’s concerti are very pleasing, but then there are so many pleasing Italian baroque concerti. Hummel v Ries. Hummel wrote some marvellous things across a range of genres and it’s not a surprise that he still gets performed and recorded quite a bit. Gliere v Kabalevsky. Kabalevsky probably- I tend to zone out when Gliere is on. Pfitzner v Schillings. Has to be Pfitzner, Palestrina in particular is quite effective, however distasteful it may be to promote either of them. Nono v Henze. I think Nono is more consistent than Henze, whose work is extensive, stylistically varied and uneven (some of it is just unmemorable in any sense, whereas you will remember what Prometeo sounds like if you’ve heard even some of it). However, the best of Henze is interesting and even enjoyable- if you like twentieth century music generally. Eg. Ondine, thé earlier symphonies, Der Junge Lord, Thé English Cat, Voices. So I’d lean towards Henze. Maxwell Davies v Maw. Has to be Max because, and I agree about a lot of his later work, he (along with Birtwistle) really shook up what was getting to be a rather conservative British musical establishment back in the day.

Great idea Dave! Can i add a sub category? I would add conductors who thought they were composers, and i would nominate Klemperer vrs Furtwangler! Paul

Albinoni, Hummel, Rubinstein, Kabalevsky and Lalo are the ones that I know and love, so I would choose them. I don’t know enough about the others to judge.

Albinoni was one of the first composers I loved, I played the I Solisti Veneti and I Musici discs of his oboe concertos to death. Sadly modern baroque orchestras do not play his work much, despite the fame of the neobaroque counterfeit. There is a good reason for this: his style wasn't made to be played rag-tag, rock 'n roll style like Vivaldi's, it's very civilized and in a way unique. I actually read Michael Talbot's excellent book on Albinoni, and he says that the he is no less than "one of the most distinctive composers not merely of his generation but of all time", a remark seemingly a little excessive but supported with an analysis of his very personal and different style. I'm reminded of this often when Hurwitz recounts the story of pretentious listeners not knowing the difference between Geminiani and another Italian baroque composer. Some of them can blend together, but Albinoni is incredibly distinctive, and I really think I could pick him out with considerable ease. It's not just because of "his great natural gifts as a tunesmith" (Talbot), but also distinctive stylistic traits. What stands out most to me is what Selfridge-Field emphasized: Albinoni's general avoidance of suspensions and dissonances, instead prefering "long series of flawless consonances". Talbot says it's because Albinoni has a penchant for harmonizing the passing notes in the bass, creating a sort of mesmeric, echoing effect, a small group of chords being heard over and over again. I loved that as a teen listener and still do now. I'm not the only one who thinks there's something to Albinoni -- Arthur Hutchings called him "ridiculously undervalued" in his famous book on Baroque Concertos. And I'm not even sure I'd let him win the duel over Pachelbel, who wrote amazing organ music and whose output is more valuable on the whole (whereas Albinoni's instrumental music only seems worth listening to, the few vocal works that have been recorded do not wow, despite being his chief concern as composer). Tells you how much even mediocre composers have to give, and I'm very grateful to this channel and the commenters for introducing me to many, including Ferdinand Ries. Thank you!

Rubinstein over Cui is an easy one. Cui is really a nonentity, his most plausible entry is the short opera, Feast During the Plague. But Rubinstein's The Demon is a marvelous opera, all too often cut when its revived. Rubinstein's piano concertos are very listenable. No.4 used to be nearly standard rep. The symphonies are also revivable, even the Ocean Symphony in its seven movement form. Raff's 3rd and 5th symphonies should be done more often. Not great but good enough to program once every other season. It has now been established that Eugen d'Albert wrote the overture to Sullivan's Patience! d'Albert gets my nod over Siegfried Wagner simply because Tiefland is a minor materpiece. If you programmed a concert with Macdowell's 2nd piano concerto and Paine's 1st or 2nd symphony, I'd be first in line to buy a ticket. Throw in Parker's lovely, underrated Hora Novissima and you have a real gala evening. (The Parker would make a great choral concert with Dett's The Ordering of Moses. )

Here’s another interesting mediocrity duel: Lachner vs Gade. I can’t weigh in all of these as I do not know enough music by some of these composers to judge. For those whose output I know enough of here are my picks: Raff (some of symphonies are quite good, and his piano concerto is excellent). Cui (if you don’t know any of his music, check out his preludes for piano) Vieuxtemps d’Albert MacDowell d’Indy (I LOVE his second symphony!) Boughton (I really enjoy his three symphonies. The coda of the first movement of his third symphony is my second favorite coda in the symphonic repertoire (my favorite is the coda of the first movement of Sibelius’ Fifth.)) Maxwell Davies (I love his cheekiness.)

Is it a sign of discernment or of lack of adventurousness that I have heard the music of so few of these composers and in most cases just one work? The only duel on which I can superficially comment is Lalo vs d'Indy, of which I prefer the former; la Symphonie Espagnole, of course, but my appetite for more has been whetted by a recent bicentenary article about his music, especially le Roi d'Ys, in Diapason. Of the few others that I have heard, you encourage me now to go back to my CDs of Glière and Maw but have no need to go back to the ultra familiar Andrea Chenier and hesitate with Bantock (though beautifully recorded), Henze(so austere) and Pfitzner's Palestrina (so long). Thanks for this.

When it comes to a comparison between Ries and Hummel, I would give the nod to Hummel. Not only did Hummel create all that music, but additionally all those figurines..

I agree with your characterization of Maw's Odyssey, but like it anyway. Strangely undemonstrative but casting a spell as it proceeds, and well laid out for orchestra. I would come to the defense of some of Henze, too--especially Ondine and his first symphony.

I love Raff's music. A terrific symphonist. His symphonies are programmatic, tuneful and always a worthwhile listen. His concertos and chamber music are also quite beautiful. Compared to Spohr whose music seems much less inspired. I do like his chamber music a lot though and the clarinet concertos are quite nice.

Nicholas Maw did contribute a pretty neat work to the concert band repertoire, but like Odyssey, it enjoyed a splash of exposure, and now seems to have disappeared. The only recording of which I know is the Marine Band, available on KZfaq. Maybe Eugene Corporon make a recording with Cincinnati, but I've not heard it.

MacDowell had his moments of true grace. The Woodland Sketches and Sea Pieces are charming. The 2nd Piano Concerto in D minor is the best American contribution to that idiom IMHO. Not very familiar with Paine but there is probably a good reason for that

That's fun! - Albinoni vs. Pachelbel: In fact, I have difficulties to distinguish one from the other stylistically. The Kanon gives me more pleasure - so: Pachelbl. - Koželuch vs. Dittersdorf: Both nice, but nothing special for me. Dittersdorf because of his "Metamorphosen", which seem to me rather inventive. But I admit that I know very few of both composers. - Hummel vs. Ries: Ries, because his imitation of Beethoven seems to me better than Hummel's imitation of Mozart. - Thalberg vs. Moscheles: Neither-nor. May I suggest Alkan? (But I doubt, if he is a mediocre composer.) - Spohr vs. Raff: Raff seems to me the more original composer. Boring are both of them. - Rubinstein vs. Cui: That's difficult, because I know some orchestra pieces by Cui and an opera ("The Demon") and the 4th symphony by Rubinstein. I would prefer Cui, because he has more colour, but both of them - well... - Wieniawski vs. Vieuxtemps: For me, both are on the same level uninteresting (and in my view rather 3rd rate than mediocre). - Siegfried Wagner vs. d’Albert: Siegfried Wagner wrote a nice orchestra piece, "Glück". D'Albert hasn't an individual style, "Tiefland" is sort of fake Leoncavallo, "Die toten Augen" sort of fake Schreker. But, nevertheless, the d'Albert-operas are less boring than Siegfried Wagner's, so I vote for d'Albert. - Giordano vs. Zandonai: I heard "Francesca da Rimini" live, so I vote for Giordano, whose "Cena delle beffe" I heard with so much interest that I forgive him "Andrea Chenier" and "Fedora". - Glière vs. Kabalevsky: Kabalevsky because of his opera "Colas Breugnon" (with a witty ouverture, and the suite is great fun) and his 2nd symphony. I prefer him because he doesn't sweat as much as Glière does. - MacDowell vs. Paine: I know that you don't like it so much, but his 2nd Piano Concerto with the pre-Rachmaninov-style is ravishing, and so are the "Woodland Sketches" with their fresh rhythms and tunes and some strange harmonies. - Lalo vs. d’Indy: That's difficult! I like d'Indy very much because of his symphonic poems and his opera "L'étranger", which is better than "Fervaal" (although "Fervaal" is one of the best Wagner-clones I know), and no work by d'Indy is so boring as the "Symphonie espagnole". But Lalo wrote "Namouna", and this ballet is very, very good. Sorry, I cannot decide, whom I prefer. Perhaps Lalo, but I'm not sure. - Bantock vs. Boughton: Boughton. A composer, who writes after Wagner a "Tristan" ("The Queen of Cornwall") in a wagnerian style, is special case, and even more so, when the composer dreams of King Arthur in his music and of the communist revolution in life. That said, "The immortal hour" is a nice opera with a few good tunes, wheras I know some of Bantocks works, and they all are unintersting, badly scored and full of empty pathos. - Pfitzner vs. Schillings: I cannot forgive Schillings that he, as an antisemite non plus ultra, displaced Schreker and provoked so his premature death. I know, one should talk just about the music, and Pfitzner was the same antisemite and nazi. Well, the music... Pfitzner wrote an ouverture "Käthchen von Heilbronn" and a short Symphony in C-major op.46, and they are much better than all I know from Schillings. So I decide for Pfitzner. The best in this style was Heinrich Kaminski, but his "Werk für Streichorchester" seems the only work of his commercially recorded. - Nono vs. Henze: Henze. Nono is nearly always the same boring serial mess. Henze has some good works, f.e. his 3rd and 6th symphonies, the operas "Die Bachantinnen" and "Elegy for Young Lovers", the oratorio "Das Floß der Medusa" and a really ravishing marvellously scored ballet, "Undine". - Maxwell Davies vs. Maw: In a concert, awork of Maw was played (I guess it was "Spring Music"), and my friend whispered: "That sounds as if in a Tchaikovsky-work the notes have gone tupsy-turvy." For me, Maw's best work is "Scenes and Arias", a quasi non-tonal successor to the "Rosenkavalier"-finale, and although I like "Odyssey" better than you do, I decide for Maxwell Davies because of two works: One is the "Orkney Wedding", which is just fun, and the other is the chamber opera "The Lighthouse", which is the scariest opera since the unsurpassed "The Turn of the Screw". Davies had a talent of wiriting real tunes, and it's a pity that he didn't do it just in minor works as "A Spell for Green Corn", "Farewell to Stromness" or "Mavis in Las Vegas".

Just for the benefit of the opera lovers amongst us: Von Schillings wrote the very enjoyable 'Mona Lisa' (with a good recording on CPO). 'Monna Vanna' is the unfinished opera of Rachmaninoff.

Albinoni vs. Pachelbel - Albinoni. Lovely concertos (and didn't write the canon) Koželuch vs. Dittersdorf - Koželuch. Such character in the symphonies, particularly later. Hummel vs. Ries - Ries. Lovely Symphonies and Piano Concertos Thalberg vs. Moscheles - Thalberg. Wonderful fantasias/transcriptions Spohr vs. Raff - Raff. His best work far surpasses that of Spohr, even if the average is about the same. Rubinstein vs. Cui - Rubinstein. I actually genuinely enjoy some of the symphonies. Wieniawski vs. Vieuxtemps - Wieniawski. Concertos are a wash, but I like Wieniawski's "snigglets" better. Siegfried Wagner vs. d’Albert - S. Wagner. Some genuinely wonderful opera excerpts (even if the whole ain't great) Giordano vs. Zandonai - Giordano. More than a one hit wonder. Glière vs. Kabalevsky - Kabalevsky. Maybe it's just the percussionist in me. MacDowell vs. Paine - MacDowell. So many of his miniatures are genuine masterpieces, not just "To a Wild Rose". Lalo vs. d’Indy - d'Indy. "French Mountain Air" beats "Espagnole" any day, and the rest of the output is comparatively similar. Bantock vs. Boughton - Bantock. The Hebridean and Celtic Symphonies are wonderful works. Pfitzner vs. Schillings - Pfitzner. Some of his chamber music is worth hearing. Nono vs. Henze - Henze. Some of his early symphonies are quite nice. Maxwell Davies vs. Maw - Maxwell Davies. I just find listening to his stuff more enjoyable.

I was sure you were going to include Stanford vs Parry.

Dave, are you familiar with an LP called 'The Duel Between Liszt and Thalberg' by Raymond Lewenthal? Deserves a shout-out from me here, one of the (imho)better recordings of Liszt's 2nd Ballade is on it, as well as a terrific recording of Thalberg's 'Moses' Fantasy.

Thank you for your videos! Speaking of Pachelbel, do you think that pieces like the Canon in D-whose fame towers over its complexity-are a boon for classical music or are a detriment? On the one hand, it’s amazing that more people will discover classical music through these kinds of pieces with incredible popularity, but then again one could say that it’s a gross misrepresentation of classical music as a whole. I’d love to hear your thoughts!

I'm not familiar with Nono enough to speak ill of him other than to say I haven't heard any music of his that impressed me. On the other hand, back in the mid seventies, as an undergraduate at University of Illinois Chicago I did take a course on Henze. I do think that certain of his pieces such as Being Beauteous and the Double Concerto for Oboe and Harp are enjoyable and well worth listening to.

Dittersdorf's symphonies - on the +/- 5 cd's which were published by Naxos - are extremely hummable. He was a very apt tunesmith, and his symphonies contain lots of humour and orchestral effects. The Kozeluch I sampled via the Bamert recordings, struck me way way less.

What do you think of Stamitz & Vanhal? Are they mediocre?

Decades ago I acquired CDs devoted to Nicholas Maw and Peter Maxwell Davies because I’d convinced myself it was my fault that I didn’t enjoy their music. Eventually I stopped blaming myself and donated those CDs to the local library. I’ve lived happily ever since. Cheers!

Pachelbel's organ music is well worth hearing if you're a fan of the instrument. Check out the Hexachordum Apollonis album from Harmonia Mundi. Some delightful and strange stuff.

Lachner vs. Hiller?

Sessions and Diamond - master and pupil When I was young in the mid-sixties Sessions was often cited as one of the nation’s finest and most fascinating composers, famous also as an important teacher of famous composers. His first two symphonies and his startlingly beautiful first Piano Sonata stand out, but most of his rather shrill astringent music baffles me. His reputation is now a wisp of its former self. Beloved pupil Diamond composed many for me very exciting symphonies, particularly those that Gerard Schwartz has recorded. I give the edge to Diamond but fear that he will join his master in near oblivion.

Which Kozeluch please Jan Antonin or Leopold?

Maxwell Davies quartets bored me despite the fact that I am an early music fanatic and he was (supposedly) evoking these older traditions. Of course, I blamed my own lack of sophistication for this.

We all know that Albinoni didn't actually write his one hit (it's a 20th century confection based on a figured bass and a sniglet or two of melody) but I still would rather listen to it than Pachelbel's one claim to fame. After working in a school where it was the only baroque piece that any of the music teachers actually knew, you quickly came to despise it in all its myriad dreadfully executed forms. Bye bye Pachelbel. But not Carl Ditters von Dittersdorf. He gets spared the cleansing fire mainly because his name is unforgettable and I have heard some pleasant enough symphonies and concertos by him. Hummel could almost be elevated into the better-than-mediocre bracket, if such spurious rankings are your thing. One of Stephen Hough's first recordings unearthed his spectacular A minor piano concerto. Played with youthful fire and brilliance, I play this disc more than any version of the two Chopin concertos. A couple of his masses are worth hearing. Ries... nah. Despite being a bona fide pianophile I can't really choose between Moscheles and Thalberg, who are both incontestably mediocre. Moscheles wrote some pedagogically useful studies and some attractively fluent piano concertos and both Earl Wild and Marc-André Hamelin have made the best possible case for Thalberg's bloated operatic transcriptions.I've never heard anything remotely memorable by Spohr of Raff. Ditch them both. Ditto Vieuxtemps and Wieniawski.. although the latter wrote a violin concertos I quite liked in my teens. Siegfried Wagner and d'Albert have both successfully stayed under my radar and I have no wish to ever hear a note by either. Not being an opera queen, I really couldn't care less about Giordano and Zandonai. I have, however, a soft spot for Glière. In my days as critic I was a natural target for those who thought they knew better. One particularly offensive know-it-all that I found myself in a room with was determined to display his superior knowledge of the repertoire. His final test, the coup de grâce that was designed to bring me to my knees in supplication before a higher power, was duly put on the turntable ( Aaaah, the vinyl years..). At first I thought he had stumped me.. a big, sloppy Russian Romantic piece was as far as I could get before a bell faintly tintinabulated. "Ilya Muromets" I shakily offered. I have never seen a face fall so drastically. Triumph! So thank you, Reinhold. But it's a bloated mess of a piece and I'd go for Kabalevsky, who at least wrote a couple of good tunes and some agreeably playable piano pieces. You'll be relieved to hear I have no opinion on MacDowell vs. Paine. D'Indy wins the next pairing by dint of his wonderful Symphony on a French Mountain Air. The only piece more dreary than Lalo's dreaded Symphonie Espagnole is his cello concerto, so its Vincent all the way here. Bantock vs. Boughton. Dunno. Both wrote unending screeds of choral and operatic stuff, very little of which has mercifully been recorded. Hence, despite being an insufferably arrogant and pretentious twat ( love your Midem story, Dave) actually wrote some listenable, even attractive stuff. Knussen's recording of Undine is a delight. Nono, not so much. Maw was responsible, indirectly, for the demise of some lovely custom-made speakers of mine, I left my partner alone in the house with Rattle's dull recording of Odyssey, and in an effort to get some juice and some presence out of it he kept on upping the volume till they blew. Max, however, has never posed any problem to my hardware. My first encounter with an Orkney Wedding and Sunrise was at a concert I had to review: the moment when the (spoiler alert) piper walks down the aisle from the back of the auditorium is a magnificent coup de théâtre and the only time I've ever enjoyed such close proximity to bagpipes. Most of his other music is grey and forgettable but on the strength of Orkney Wedding Max beats Maw, hands down.

Tallbird or Motionless? Hard to choose. :D

Hugo Alfven v. Christian Sinding Florence Price v. William Grant Still Suk v. Smetana Louise Farrenc v. Augusta Holmès

I pick Umberto Giordano over EVERYBODY else on the list - especially his real unknown gem of an opera: "Siberia" (1903). Otherwise: Raff over Spohr, Rubinstein over Cui, Glière - the Symphony No. 3 in Stokowsky's arrangement is wonderful, I don''t know Kabalevsky at all; Pfitzner wrote wonderful lieder, and several operas by Henze were on the margins of the standard repertoire for a time. To my mind, of the "modern" composers, he was by far the most gifted - at least he wrote MUSIC, while Nono, like most of the others, only wrote SOUNDS.

I did like some of Maxwell Davies early avant-garde stuff. His later style is pretty turgid. I went to the premier of his 10th symphony. It was a choral symphony and was only memorable for the natty waistcoat he was wearing as he was applauded by a standing ovation of members of the British musical establishment present after the performance. He was even the Master of the Queen's Music at the time. His 8 songs for a Mad King might ironically save him against Maw.

My choices (where I can): Pachelbel, simply because that one thing he's known for is vastly better than anything that Albinoni (really) wrote Dittersdorf, always loved Dittersdorf Ries Raff... oh my gosh I love Raff! Charming, melodic--atmosphere and emotion; things sorely lacking in Spohr (who isn't really that bad, but... oh my gosh I love Raff) Glière, who has more range and more beauty at his best. Kabalevsky often comes across to me as Khachaturyan without the spice Paine, but alas this is more a failing in MacDowell than a virtue in Paine Bantock Maxwell Davies, but see my Paine/MacDowell comment

This was great. Wasn’t Hummel also a FOB? Wasn’t he one of Beethoven’s coffin carriers?

I'm only going to comment on the one's I care about; life's too short. Albinoni for opp. 5, 7 & 9 - nothing second-rate there. Raff for Symphonies 2 & 5, Thuringer Suite & Overture 'Ein feste Burg.' Henze for the 7th Symphony & Barcarola.

I esteem Pachelbel's organ works as a group, and there have been at least two complete recordings, so he bests Albinoni. I esteem Pfitzner's opera Palestrina, Glière's Third Symphony, Hummel's Trumpet Concerto, Lalo's Symphonie espagnole and Henze's L'Upupa, so their competitors forfeit by default. I esteem both Andrea Chénier by Giordano and Francesca da Rimini by Zandonai, so that contest is a draw. These results reflect more the state of my ignorance than the intrinsic worth of the composers' artistic achievements. I am sure that if I knew the oeuvre of each and every competitor, there would be more winners.

What an impressive litany of total lack of distinction. I've listened to works by every single one of these over the years. I think the only work that I've ever returned to intentionally is Albinoni's Adagio. It's not all bad, just mostly forgettable. Here's one to put you to sleep: Cyril Rootham vs Jospeh Holbrooke.

Nono and Henze, definitely not producers of the socialist realism that would please either the subjects or the rulers of "Proletarian" governments. As for Maxwell Davies, if nothing else he gave us the lovely little piano piece "Farewell to Stromness".

Let's see how it goes... Albinoni Kozeluch Hummel (for a mile) Moscheles Raff (rather clear to me) Rubinstein (obviously) Vieuxtemps (he wrote more concertos and also composed some chamber music, so he wins) d'Albert (pretty easy, mostly for his two refined, elegant, well-crafted string quartets and Cello Concerto) Zandonai (another easy) Kabalevsky (hard to make a decision) Neither MacDowell nor Paine, I don't care for any of those d'Indy Bantock, of course Pfitzner Henze Neither Maxwell Davies nor Maw, both pretty uninteresting to me

I have a soft spot for Peter Maxwell Davies. I also have a soft spot for filmmaker Ken Russell. which is perhaps why I have a soft spot for "Mad" Max.

I prefer Albinoni, Ries, Raff, Dittersdorf, Thalberg, D'Albert, Cui, D'Indy, MacDowell, Bantock, Schillings, Kabalevsky, Henze and Maw.

For me, it has to be Raff over Spohr. Raff at least produced one enjoyable and memorable symphony (No. 5). I can find no equivalent in Spohr's output.

....And then there's Maw! I remember hearing OF Odyssey at the time, never got a chance to listen. A cursory check of Amazon produced scant CDs....but a great many scores. So your viewers have the opportunity to perform his works. Perhaps they'll tell us non musicians about the experience.

I think Albinoni and Dittersdorf are clear choices. Sadly, a decent amount of Albinoni's music was lost during the Dresden bombing. But there is enough of his music, the opus 5, 7 & 9 in particular which includes some very nice concertos. More than one can say about Pachelbel. I enjoy some of the Dittersdorf symphonies on Naxos. I played a movement from one of them in the high school orchestra I was in. I'll take Kabelevsky over Gliere. He wrote a fine violin concerto as well as the very witty The Comedians. I'd also take Lalo over D'Indy. Both the Cello Concerto and Symphonie Espagnole still make regular appearances at concerts. D'Indy's star seems to have faded in recent decades.

Wieniawski over Vieuxtemps any day. Both write highly idiomatically for the violin, but I think Wieniawski usually has more charming melodies. I'd single out his Op.7 (played by Ivry Gitlis) his Op.15 (played by Maxim Vengerov) and his Op.21 (played by Kyung-Wha Chung) as particular favorites. I like Wieniawski enough to where I find "mediocre" to be a harsh term, but then again, I'll grant that my being an amateur violinist likely makes me find his pieces more interesting than they'd be otherwise

Crafty Mr. Hurwitz threw s... on the fan and squints slyly from under his glasses watching the reaction.Don't give in to provocation! Ok, I give up... Of course Hummel is greater composer than Ries. His chamber music is enjoyable, his folklor-like tunes from scherzos are effervescent. And his piano concerts are splendid. And, of course, Koželuch had never written anything equal in value to the Dittersdorf's great string quartets.

For the longest time, the only thing I knew about Cui was that whenever I read about a piece by another Russian composer, there was a little sentence somewhere that amounted to "Cui thought it was terrible".

As a swede I must say Zandonai because he wrote the opera I Cavalieri di Ekebu. A masterpiece in my very colored opinion. But I have to say I like Fedora a lot, but Zandonai gets my vote for using a Swedish story. We need more of that in my very nationalistic opinion.

I take Albinoni, d'Indy, Raff, Maxwell Davies and Nono over their competitors. The other pairings I can't judge. Also, I'd like to propose Günter Bialas vs. Max Trapp. 🫠

Most of these I don't really have a horse in the race, but: 1. Pachelbel wins b/c Albinoni didn't even write the Adagio. I've also heard other Pachelbel that I think is perfectly OK (not amazing, but nice). 2. I actually rather like Dittersdorf, though I admit he's mediocre, so he wins. 11. MacDowell is basically fine, and Paine hasn't made any impression on me, so MacDowell for me. 15. I'm picking Henze. There's a certain period of Henze's output in the 60s where he's been spending time in Italy and is generally in a less humorless mood than usual for modern German types, and things get sort of lyrical. Pieces like "Musens Siciliens" and "Cantata della fiaba estrema". Nono isn't bad, but he's never charming in my experience. 16. Peter Maxwell Davies wins this one. His more populist/accessible works like "Orkney Wedding and Sunrise" and "Farewell to Stromness" aren't mediocre at all. His more serious/austere works are basically admirable and worth hearing.

Regarding your first pair, Pachelbel vs. Albinioni, Pachelbel's Canon in D may be dull and boring, but at least he wrote it. The "Albinioni Adagio" is actually a fake composed by Remo Giazotto in 1958 and passed off as a lost Albinioni work from a scrap of a manuscript found in the wreckage of a library otherwise destroyed in a World War II bombing raid (yeah, RIGHT … )

Ditters for Ovid, Hummel for his bassoon concerto, Raff for the sinfonietta and the symphonies especially the seasons. Cui vs Rubinstein: none!

Hummel easily over Ries for me. He may have been a Mozartian, but I think his music advanced stylistically well beyond Mozart. (Hummel's piano concertos are personal favorites.) Ries, on the other hand, seemed content to remain ensconced in Beethoven's long shadow without developing a distinctive voice of his own. I'd much rather enjoy real Beethoven than a dubious imitation. Also, kudos on this idea, which sheds light on obscure composers.

Have to disagree about Wieniawski, some of his stuff is genuinely inspired.

Albinoni-Giazotto, absolutely. The Albinoni original would be nice to find. The Pachelbel, by contrast, is just way overdone, and stupidly, almost nobody does the attached Gigue, which is a vastly superior piece...

How about crap composer duels? Boulez would come out the undisputed champion, though my personal choice might be Orff just to annoy the hoi polloi.

We all know that Salieri is the champion of mediocrities.

Henze!! Oh yes I remember going to a concert with him conducting the première of one of his works... Can't remember what it was called, but there was next to zero applause from the audience afterwards 😂. Fortunately the evening was redeemed by Mahler 5 in the second half...

Lalo VS d'Indy... are you serious? They are not in the same class...

Hummel is above mediocre in my book. Also Albinoni. And Wieniawski is maybe mediocre, but how fun.

- albinioni - kozeluch -hummel -raff - gliere don't know the others

I disagree about d'Indy, he wrote some gorgeous and wonderful music, try for instance the Suite dans le style ancien op.24 or the Concert op.89, genuine French music of the first class. For a real mediocre composers duet, I propose Rieding v Seitz (the beginner violinists will understand...)

What an excellent collection of mediocre composers.

Dare I suggest Del Tredici (in his Alice phase) and Hovhaness?

Holst vs Orff too obvious?

Hanon vs Czerny: the bane of piano students Boulez vs Stockhausen: the bane of music lovers K.K.Sorabji vs Havergal Brian: the bane of the short-winded