replies None taken--I am simply asking questions relating to the question I originally posted, and based upon what others have written. You may (or may not) delite in knowing I do not enjoy Wikipedia. I find it useful for constants (i.e. formulas, the height of the highest skyscraper). Biographies, measuring what one has accomplished is a harder task, and should imho not be reserved for any jack who thinks he’s up to the challenge. I find it interesting the challenge of one proving that Classical Music can be determined today, not by future music historians at some indeterminate time in the future. If all pieces could be gauged off other pieces, one might say Debussy sounds like Chopin, only more baroque, like J.S. Bach. Tchaikovsky sounds like Wagner only more systematic… Terez, I admit I have not studied the background of the classical forefathers in fine detail, but that is not the central question is it? It is defining what is a classical piano piece and what is not. And though I already have answers, I enjoy continuing the conversation. So that's what this is then--a competition? With all due respect Techneut, I never signed up to compete, and I do not wish to. I only posted this first topic for a discussion, not to keep score. I will dissapoint you, I don't think I am capable of "new agey piano pieces" If you read The Mozart Myth’s A critical reassessment it talks about it. I recommend it. As I state above, I posted a topic that explores what is a classical piano piece and what is not. I don’t know what I can do to convince you? Give you money? I have tried by writing you and telling your that I was... :? No bone to pick sir. Being nosy is a good thing, Just ask all of the piano composers who have created beautiful works inspired by others! I don’t think you could. One thing is if you tried it would probably take a real long time.