I've explained before in detail exactly what I mean with the expression "traditional music." Terms either have meaning, or there's no point in using them. That's why I've tried to be clear. I'm not referring necessarily to a style of music, although in my case, the preference is always for classical. Yet, that classical music need not be Baroque. In fact, I think Baroque music sounds terrible on synthesizers. The reason it's been so popular, I would guess, is that Baroque music used counterpoint, which conveniently consisted of individual lines performed simultaneously. That happened to suit the multi-tracking of synthesizer parts, each of which could then use a different patch. The two seemed to be a perfect match for each other. But in my opinion, the synthesizer could never improve on the sound of the original acoustic instruments, and the numberless attempts I've listened to for decades make that certain in my mind. There have been some impressive attempts, alright, but still.
By the expression "traditional music" I always mean the use of the fundamental elements of melody, harmony, beat, and rhythm. Where I part with the typical synthesizer music is in what I would call a mind-numbing exaggerated use of beat and rhythm - due to the use of drum machines and related devices - and also with the additionally exaggerated use of repetition, due to looping and sequencing. To these four fundamental elements of music I would also add those of form and theme and development. These are the most challenging elements in composition - the intellectual aspects that require effort and discipline in giving a coherent shape to the musical ideas that might have come quickly and easily. To mention two examples - the beginning and the end. The first few measures of a composition can be very difficult to create, and so can the conclusion of the whole piece, which must somehow, by a near miracle, conclude in a logical and beautiful way all that has gone before it. Traditional music includes these, but what I constantly hear among synthesists is the avoidance of the beginning and the end, and the replacement of them with a convenient fading in and fading out, so that there really isn't a beginning and definitely isn't a conclusion.
When I refer to the absence of "traditional music" performed on solo synthesizer on YouTube, I mean complete keyboard (!) compositions performed start to finish by a human being's hands and/or feet, without other devices that occupy an awful lot of time and space, and that use the above mentioned-elements of music. What I also dislike in the use of these ubiquitous little devices is their covering over of the sound of the synthesizer. A fine carefully designed patch deserves to be heard from start to finish.
I guess what amazes me is that the above paragraph seems like Egyptian hieroglyphics to synthesists. So be it. But jeepers, give it a chance. This is where I believe there could arise a fabulous repertoire of mature (!) solo synthesizer music - complete compositions that need nothing except one synthesizer (or several) and one synthesist (or several). And what is frustrating is when the response to this proposition is, "Well, that's not real synthesizer music, cause you're not using the synthesizer like a real synthesist would." In other words, my music is not real synthesizer music, but your synthesizer music is, because of the high priority that equipment plays in its creation. Nonsense! Real synthesizer music consists of music composed for a synthesizer, even if that music could be performed on an organ or a piano. It was intended first and foremost for the synthesizer, and the lofty place given to the traditional elements of music changes nothing. It's synthesizer music, period.