What's the point of listening to so much music?

[greg]

Well the answer to the question of this topic is basically, as I said:
Perpetual discovery > Perpetual stagnation. 


(except for some people)

[(poco) Sforzando]

I thought you couldn't get any more ridiculous, and then...
(btw, I think Karl is about your size, so he probably would have said the same things. You know, "fool," "idiot," "noncomposer..." Oh wait, that was you. Nevermind).

And you say Karl is the mean one?...

In The World According to Saul, respect is evidently something that is owed to Saul by others. It is not something that others are owed by Saul.

Now that the 6', 220 lb. composer is on hiatus, and no doubt reviewing all his laudatory e-mails, I'll try to post something actually relevant to the thread later today.

[owlice]

Thanks, Sarge; it's desperate times when one of my posts is considered a glimpse of sanity!

Philo, I miss the bunnies!

Karl, I think that's the only time I performed with Frühbeck de Burgos. It made a huge impression on me, how much difference his conducting the work made for me. I'd never had that experience before -- it was a complete revelation and I loved loved loved singing the work after that rehearsal.

[Brian]

http://www.youtube.com/v/DW4YDypf7qs

This is friggin' hilarious.

[karlhenning]

Thanks, Sarge; it's desperate times when one of my posts is considered a glimpse of sanity!

Hah! : )

Karl, I think that's the only time I performed with Frühbeck de Burgos. It made a huge impression on me, how much difference his conducting the work made for me. I'd never had that experience before -- it was a complete revelation and I loved loved loved singing the work after that rehearsal.

That is wonderful, when a conductor guides you into the heart of a piece. My pleasure in this story is profound.

[Philoctetes]

This is friggin' hilarious.

He was on Tosh.0 with his cousin. A very funny interview.

[Philoctetes]

Thanks, Sarge; it's desperate times when one of my posts is considered a glimpse of sanity!

Philo, I miss the bunnies!

Karl, I think that's the only time I performed with Frühbeck de Burgos. It made a huge impression on me, how much difference his conducting the work made for me. I'd never had that experience before -- it was a complete revelation and I loved loved loved singing the work after that rehearsal.

They're still around. I mean a samurai has to have a pet, right?!

[greg]

This is friggin' hilarious.

Yeah, and the guy in the background with no shirt on made it even more bizarre...

[DavidW]

I agree with Sarge about hey listen to 1 time or many.  I listen as many times as I feel myself either liking the music or liking it more.  When I fall off that hill towards starting to dislike it's time for a break, and I'll come back to it later.   Anyway that works out to anywhere 1-20 listens when it's new depending on the work and my mood.  No need to repetively listen for the sake of it (or to feel you got your moneys worth).

[Philoctetes]

I agree with Sarge about hey listen to 1 time or many.  I listen as many times as I feel myself either liking the music or liking it more.  When I fall off that hill towards starting to dislike it's time for a break, and I'll come back to it later.   Anyway that works out to anywhere 1-20 listens when it's new depending on the work and my mood.  No need to repetively listen for the sake of it (or to feel you got your moneys worth).

I find that I have to listen to a work multiple times simply to "get it". Sort of how I watch movies more than once so that I can try and take it all in. I view music in a very similar fashion. And simply because I don't understand something, say the music of Haydn, it is no knock against the composer, and I continue to listen to his music, in search of that right recording that just makes it all click for me.

[greg]

And simply because I don't understand something, say the music of Haydn, it is no knock against the composer, and I continue to listen to his music, in search of that right recording that just makes it all click for me.

Of course, if there is one... it's always good to search, though sometimes you just might not like the music itself. 

[DavidW]

I find that I have to listen to a work multiple times simply to "get it". Sort of how I watch movies more than once so that I can try and take it all in. I view music in a very similar fashion. And simply because I don't understand something, say the music of Haydn, it is no knock against the composer, and I continue to listen to his music, in search of that right recording that just makes it all click for me.

Yeah same here, there are many Bach works where I just have to listen and listen because there is so much going on that it sounds alien until it clicks.  While Vivaldi just clicks right at first.

[Benji]

I agree with Sarge about hey listen to 1 time or many.  I listen as many times as I feel myself either liking the music or liking it more.  When I fall off that hill towards starting to dislike it's time for a break, and I'll come back to it later.   Anyway that works out to anywhere 1-20 listens when it's new depending on the work and my mood.  No need to repetively listen for the sake of it (or to feel you got your moneys worth).

Copland said that he would never admit to disliking a work until he could categorically say that he understood why he disliked it, and that otherwise it felt like unfinished business.

I like to think i'm the same, except that I don't have the musical training or genius that Copland had. For that reason I could never say I dislike a composition because it is poorly written or notated etc, though like any reasonably experienced but non-trained listener I may have an inkling that this may be the case. So it's really the experience that i've built up from 15 years of listening that I rely on to help me sort the wheat from the chaff, and even then the 'chaff' pile is more a 'actual chaff or unrecognisable wheat' pile that I may sift through at another time when I may be better at recognising wheat.

In a kernel (you know I mean nutshell but i'm keeping my metaphors themed), I try never to write something off until I know for a fact that it isn't my own limitations that are preventing me from enjoying, or at least undestanding, it. Which is why i've yet to find a work that I will categorically say I dislike.

(apologies for the naff metaphor)

[Philoctetes]

Of course, if there is one... it's always good to search, though sometimes you just might not like the music itself. 

I leave that open as a possibility, but I find that difficult to accept with composers such as Haydn, Bach, Schoenberg, etc. Perhaps because of their clout, I sort of just make an assumption that there is at least one piece, one performance, that my mind can conform too and accept (outside of the pure respect aspect, which should always be implicit).

[Scarpia]

http://www.youtube.com/v/DW4YDypf7qs

http://www.youtube.com/v/LlbpnodtfUg

Nick's response is even more devastating.   

[owlice]

They're still around. I mean a samurai has to have a pet, right?!

Maybe even two of them! (Glad to know they are still around. )

[karlhenning]

The bunnies rock!

[DavidW]

Interesting post Ben.  I guess when I don't like something I don't see it as either me or the composer failed.  No, I blame the performer!   Nah okay seriously it's good that you keep going back over the chaffe because I find that as a listener my tastes change and so what didn't appeal to me a few years ago, might appeal to me and vica versa.

[Benji]

Interesting post Ben.  I guess when I don't like something I don't see it as either me or the composer failed.  No, I blame the performer!   Nah okay seriously it's good that you keep going back over the chaffe because I find that as a listener my tastes change and so what didn't appeal to me a few years ago, might appeal to me and vica versa.

Oh there is definitely an issue of performance - all of us will have examples of works that we didn't get until a certain interpretation unlocked it for you. So I suppose it's completely reasonable to lay the blame at the performer's feet sometimes, but then that's the more subjective issue of interpretation and doesn't have much to do with a work's intrinsic value (or at least the soundness of its composition). I mean, a carrot can be interpreted as a tasty vegetable or the spawn of Satan, but there's no denying its nutritional value, whereas a turd is still a turd even if you interpret it as fly food or whatever. 

[karlhenning]

I am glad to say I have never been in the supermarket yet where the carrots were the spawn of Satan.

(Where do you go shopping, Ben?)

; )