Composers you don't get

[Josquin des Prez]

I'm not talking about composers who's music you don't like, for whatever reason, but composers who's music you just don't seem to understand, at all. For me it has to be Berlioz. Nothing of what this musician does makes sense to me. He always starts good, building up moments of apparent great beauty, and then he holds back at the last minute, and leaves you there wondering what the hell just happened. Its like going to a restaurant and have the waiter walk by, and every time it seems like he's about to drop a plate on your table he just walks away at the last second. And this happens over and over, until you realize that you are just never going to eat that day, and simply walk away. Anybody with a similar experience to share?

[springrite]

I'm not talking about composers who's music you don't like, for whatever reason, but composers who's music you just don't seem to understand, at all. For me it has to be Berlioz. Nothing of what this musician does makes sense to me. He always starts good, building up moments of apparent great beauty, and then he holds back at the last minute, and leaves you there wondering what the hell just happened. Its like going to a restaurant and have the waiter walk by, and every time it seems like he's about to drop a plate on your table he just walks away at the last second. And this happens over and over, until you realize that you are just never going to eat that day, and simply walk away. Anybody with a similar experience to share?

Furtwangler. I will keep trying since I stubbornly refuse to think that this great music I admire is a boring meandering composer.

Bruckner. I've explained before but I am getting into a couple of works, namely #2 and #5, along with #9. #7 is close...

[Lethevich]

Mahler. All my other tastes point towards him as the apex of what I should enjoy, but I by and large do not. There's nothing wrong with the length, structure, scope or style of writing for orchestra. It's more to do with the thematic material often sounding strained to me, almost forced through in a rhetorical manner rather than growing. I realise that the composer's juxtapositions and mood swings are considered one of his main stylistic fingerprints, but when these swings occur during transitional passages, I am fine, and yet large sections of the 5th and much of the 9th just don't make sense to me. The opening of the 5th almost sounds like an off the cuff hummed idea being lavishly orchestrated rather than improved upon. The 1st, 4th and 7th come closest to sounding natural to me, although I am at a loss as how to explain why. The 2nd and 3rd are in la-la land as far as I can grasp.

I still listen to the composer a lot, and can enjoy really good recordings of the music, with some almost convincing me at times, but there are still quite a few "wat" moments.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I'm not talking about composers who's music you don't like, for whatever reason, but composers who's music you just don't seem to understand, at all. For me it has to be Berlioz.

I do have some problems with Berlioz. Somebody said that his music consisted of attempts to go mad without ever quite succeeding. There's something to that.

Another one I don't get - Debussy. Yeah, I know he's supposed to be great and modern and all that. But his work just sounds like mush to me.

Come to think of it, I have a general problem with the French musical aesthetic. Too much atmosphere and perfume and effects; not enough structural rigour.

[springrite]

I do have some problems with Berlioz. Somebody said that his music consisted of attempts to go mad without ever quite succeeding. There's something to that.

That description is what I feel about it as well, although I do like Berlioz. It reminds me of a few screenwriters and playwrights I know. Being a psychologist, I occasionally get a consultation about one of their projects. But more often than not, I do not get the consultation call but see their finished product -- often with a psycho character. It is a weird to see how a sane person trying to portray a psycho without knowing what that really is all about. Remember Frazer Crane in CHEERS trying to be the hunter--macho-man--outdoors man?

[not edward]

For me, it's Schumann. In theory I understand where his music is coming from (and I do appreciate a lot of Schumann-influenced composers) but in reality I simply have no point of connection with it, either emotional nor intellectual. Hence, while I might enjoy some pieces in good performances, the music never sticks with me after I'm finished.

[karlhenning]

Interesting thread! Although a fan of Berlioz, I shan't interrupt the flow . . . I understand that Hey, but!... isn't really the point here : )

[Lethevich]

Oh, I forgot that forums can be used for discussion for a moment there.

JPD: do you have the same reservation about Berlioz's later, less "statement-y" works? L'enfance du Christ, nuits d'été, Béatrice et Bénédict are more "classical" in conception, more emotionally cool.

[ibanezmonster]

Most of the time, if I don't "get" a composer, all that is required is to spend time listening to them later.

The only two I really doubt I'll ever get are Berio and Stockhausen (I just like some of the Sinfonia and Gruppen). After that, Mozart and Corelli, but I could probably easily cure that with more listening.

[springrite]

Interesting thread! Although a fan of Berlioz, I shan't interrupt the flow . . . I understand that Hey, but!... isn't really the point here : )

The hey! is OK, but the but! isn't.

[karlhenning]

I'll keep that in mind: but out . . . .

[karlhenning]

Oh, I forgot that forums can be used for discussion for a moment there.

JPD: do you have the same reservation about Berlioz's later, less "statement-y" works? L'enfance du Christ, nuits d'été, Béatrice et Bénédict are more "classical" in conception, more emotionally cool.

And even though the scale is grand, I should add: Les Troyens.

[Mn Dave]

Dittersdorf and all those anti-music Modernists.

[MDL]

Haydn (so many works, so much tedium)
Rossini (fun overtures, the operas suck)
Handel (the operas suck from beginning to end)
Mozart (the symphonies are nice, but the piano concertos are boring and the operas are vastly overrated)

[The new erato]

Oh, I forgot that forums can be used for discussion for a moment there.

JPD: do you have the same reservation about Berlioz's later, less "statement-y" works? L'enfance du Christ, nuits d'été, Béatrice et Bénédict are more "classical" in conception, more emotionally cool.

Berlioz is a sore spot for me as well (there are more), but you succeeded in mentioning the 3 works that made me not posting him.

[Sandra]

It's interesting that I've had, almost exactly, the same experiences with all the works people referred to here - except I have now completely overcome my discomfort with Debussy.

[The new erato]

Haydn (so many works, so much tedium)So much humour.
Rossini (fun overtures, the operas suck)Check - I agree
Handel (the operas suck from beginning to end)No, some of my favorie music, a wealth og gloriuos melody and invention.
Mozart (the symphonies are nice, but the piano concertos are boring and the operas are vastly overrated) My take is the totally opposite of yours. And the chamber mudic is great

See insertions.

[Dundonnell]

Mozart....apart from the last three symphonies.
Late Mahler.
Delius.
Rachmaninov...apart from the First Symphony and "The Bells".
Skalkottas.
Webern.

[springrite]

I see no one has mentioned Hennings!

Well, I don't always "get" Karl's music, apart from the vocal works. Maybe it is because I don't have much Wourien, part from vocal works? I don't know...

[AllegroVivace]

Mahler is an interesting case. I can see his talent. His scores are condensed with creativity and imagination, but the music just doesn't communicate to me. I have had similar experiences with Beethoven too. Perhaps repeated listening is the cure.