Classical music relies on a dense network of institutions, patronage systems, educational infrastructure, and performing ensembles to work. You can't just take Mozart, plop him in the middle of Virginia, and expect him to make his artistic living just as well as he did in Vienna, the center of the musical universe. Who would he write for? What opera houses were there to stage his works? Who would pay him?As a composer, you need opera houses, you need orchestras, you need wealthy patrons willing to fund these things (and maybe you), you need publishers to print and circulate your music, you need good educational systems to produce performers of good quality to populate these ensembles, and so on. Europe already had all of this, starting arguably in the Renaissance, but certainly by the time of the early 18th century. America had to build all of this up from the ground.

Let me point out some landmarks for you.

In 1792, the first opera house opens in the US, the Théâtre St. Pierre in New Orleans.

1799, the first standing Philharmonic orchestra is established. But most orchestras in these early years did not last very long.

In 1832, composer Lowell Mason establishes the Boston Academy of Music, essentially the first music school in the US.

1842, the Philharmonic Society of New York is established. It is only the third philharmonic to be established in the US, and it is the first to become permanent. It still exists today as the New York Philharmonic.

So you can see that the century is basically halfway over by the time the US has even one decent orchestral group that's somewhat permanent. And this only 10 years after the first education dedicated specifically to music as a professional activity was established. Meanwhile, conservatories flowered across Italy in the 18th century, and there were dense networks of apprenticeships that afforded educational opportunities across Germany and France as well (less so in England, until the 19th century).

With all of this in mind, it is no wonder that the composers that did flourish in America composed mostly songs, like the aforementioned Lowell Mason, who wrote "Nearer, my god, to thee." Or march composers like John Philip Sousa. Composers relied on the institutions of music making they had at hand, and what america had in spades were church choirs in need of hymns and brass bands in need of marches. It took until the early 20th century for America to have the performing institutions to support the likes of Edward MacDowell (who, it should be noted, had to get his education in Germany) and Amy Beach, who both wrote several successful large-scale orchestral works. And of course, the 20th century is an entirely different story, one that is much more populated by American voices.

Hey there,

Just to let you know, your question is fine, and we're letting it stand. However, you should be aware that questions framed as 'Why didn't X do Y' relatively often don't get an answer that meets our standards (in our experience as moderators). There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, it often can be difficult to prove the counterfactual: historians know much more about what happened than what might have happened. Secondly, 'why didn't X do Y' questions are sometimes phrased in an ahistorical way. It's worth remembering that people in the past couldn't see into the future, and they generally didn't have all the information we now have about their situations; things that look obvious now didn't necessarily look that way at the time.

If you end up not getting a response after a day or two, consider asking a new question focusing instead on why what happened did happen (rather than why what didn't happen didn't happen) - this kind of question is more likely to get a response in our experience. Hope this helps!