Composers you don't get

[Madiel]

Well I'm glad you like Holmboe's music. I simply do not and can't find anything redeeming about it other than to say it's pretty lifeless sounding to me, but a lot of it could be attributed to the BIS set I own which isn't all that impressive performance-wise either. I guess, at the end of the day, I just don't connect with the music because, to me, it lacks substance. Structure alone doesn't sell a composer for me. I respond emotionally to a piece of music whether it be a harmonic voicing that I find appealing or a rhythm that just hits me in the gut. With Holmboe, I get nothing, but, again, I'm glad you enjoy the music.

Thanks. And I think you're just illustrating that so much of it is about personal preferences.  There are composers where I'm responding to them more on the intellectual, construction side of things, and less on the emotional, hit-me-in-the-gut side of things.  And Holmboe is definitely one of those.  I don't know that any of his work moves me in the profoundly emotional way that some others can.  The 8th symphony probably comes closest, but even that's still a sense of excitement and awe rather than deep, profound emotion.

And for you, Holmboe doesn't supply the things you want music to supply.  I can completely understand that.

[Mirror Image]

Thanks. And I think you're just illustrating that so much of it is about personal preferences.  There are composers where I'm responding to them more on the intellectual, construction side of things, and less on the emotional, hit-me-in-the-gut side of things.  And Holmboe is definitely one of those.  I don't know that any of his work moves me in the profoundly emotional way that some others can.  The 8th symphony probably comes closest, but even that's still a sense of excitement and awe rather than deep, profound emotion.

And for you, Holmboe doesn't supply the things you want music to supply.  I can completely understand that.

As a listener, isn't it always about personal subjectivity and preferences? We respond to what we respond to and at the end of the day we may say x composer does this for me and y composer does that for me, but music is such a personal thing that I don't think we can really explain why we love the things we love. I mean sure we can certainly try and I know I try to stress to people what I look for in music but it's incredibly difficult for me to do. Although I did say I'm hit by music emotionally, I'm captivated by it intellectually as well or else I wouldn't bother to keep listening. Emotion only goes so far, it's what is said to you after the music has stopped that is more profound than what has come before. Does that make any sense?

[Madiel]

As a listener, isn't it always about personal subjectivity and preferences? We respond to what we respond to and at the end of the day we may say x composer does this for me and y composer does that for me, but music is such a personal thing that I don't think we can really explain why we love the things we love. I mean sure we can certainly try and I know I try to stress to people what I look for in music but it's incredibly difficult for me to do. Although I did say I'm hit by music emotionally, I'm captivated by it intellectually as well or else I wouldn't bother to keep listening. Emotion only goes so far, it's what is said to you after the music has stopped that is more profound than what has come before. Does that make any sense?

About as much as anything said in words about the language of music can!

[snyprrr]

John Rutter

[snyprrr]

btw- I'm just trying to keep this Thread On Topic!

[snyprrr]

I also think that I 'get' EVERY Composer, because I judge them all according to their own paradigms. No one surprises me... context context context!!!

[Philoctetes]

Bartok. Was reminded of this this morning when I heard the finale of his 3rd string quartet. His material doesn't interest me, and what he does with it doesn't interest me. I've given him plenty of chances.

I was of the same mind until I heard his lone opera and his tone poems. I also find his piano concertos (Boulez) very enjoyable.

[Philoctetes]

Schnittke is another composer I just don't get and I don't think I'll ever get. Bare in mind, that it's not the composer's fault that I dislike his music. I simply just don't like the way he composes music. His style seems so cold and distant.

Have you tried his Concero Grossi? I have similar sentiments when it comes to his concertos and symphonies, but I really enjoyed his handling of these chamber pieces.

[starrynight]

Bartok. Was reminded of this this morning when I heard the finale of his 3rd string quartet. His material doesn't interest me, and what he does with it doesn't interest me. I've given him plenty of chances.

I can find some of Bartok interesting, like his 4th and 6th quartets.  But I do find his musical ideas to be boring quite often, the exotic side of it just isn't enough for me.

And with Berlioz I suppose you could say having a beautiful sound to the music isn't always enough.

[starrynight]

I also think that I 'get' EVERY Composer, because I judge them all according to their own paradigms. No one surprises me... context context context!!!

Absolutely.  Just about every composer will have done work somebody will be able to like somewhere, it's a matter of how much patience you have.  As there is so much music out there, inevitably some people will get more priority than others in your listening.

And on the question of emotion that was brought up, I think all music needs some emotion and the performer has to find that.  But however emotively done a performance is the actual material conveyed has to be interesting enough to the listener.  What makes a memorable motif or melody?  Probably something that is individual and not that generic, and which has good contrast within a piece and inspires good drama and/or development while also allowing a fluent enough flow of musical ideas.  And over time with accumulated listening and increased understanding of styles opinions on these factors  can develop and change.

[Karl Henning]

As a listener, isn't it always about personal subjectivity and preferences?

Not always. Thank heaven, the truth is richer than that.

[Karl Henning]

btw- I'm just trying to keep this Thread On Topic!

And you're the man to do it! [wink, wink]

[jlaurson]

Bartok. Was reminded of this this morning when I heard the finale of his 3rd string quartet. His material doesn't interest me, and what he does with it doesn't interest me. I've given him plenty of chances.

Oh, you simply must hear Bartok String Quartets live!! First or second row with a favorite quartet. When you see them bop and hop and sweat and the second violinist's shock of hair flopping back and forth madly, and the first violinist puckers his lips in delight, along with the pizzicato sections, that's when the magic begins to happen. Your ears will listen to the inescapable power of rhythm, rather than something else... and conversion is but minutes away. :-)

Also: Bluebeard, as mentioned above, is a great ticket. Open that fifth door and it's like being flooded with a cinematic flight of epic proportions.

In any case, the whole idea of "I don't get XYZ" as I understand it -- hopeless cases like Rutter excepted -- is the underlying, implicit question: "What can I do to 'get it'"? Where am I lacking or thinking in the wrong direction?" This should not - and hopefully isn't - the cul-de-sac of threads on GMG, where we go and dump our musical ignorances with one last, relieved sigh... but the catalyst where we get new ideas how to appreciate Verdi or Bartok or Berlioz or Schnittke. Or at least why others can and do. Which is really what makes music so wonderfully interesting, given enough time and will to invest into it. It's what keeps the museum-culture of classical music from quite devouring us yet.

[Karl Henning]

-- hopeless cases like Rutter excepted --

(* pounds the table *)

[snyprrr]

And you're the man to do it! [wink, wink]

gggeee-yuk!!

btw- your new avatar is giving me a strobe-ache Is that one of the military's new disorienting weapons?

[Karl Henning]

You are getting sleeeeepy, you vill listen to ze Telemann . . . .

[Christo]

hopeless cases like Rutter excepted

There's always a superlative degree. His name is Karl Jenkins.   

[Lethevich]

I already suspected I would like Holmboe before I heard a note.  Happily, the suspicion turned out to be correct.

Same, this happened to me with Havergal Brian too (to a lesser extent) and others. It's a strange feeling.

[starrynight]

but the catalyst where we get new ideas how to appreciate Verdi or Bartok or Berlioz or Schnittke. Or at least why others can and do.

Often though I'm not sure people express too well why they like something beyond that they think a work is a masterpiece or a composer a genius.

[jlaurson]

Often though I'm not sure people express too well why they like something beyond that they think a work is a masterpiece or a composer a genius.

Not without prodding, no. But it's what I love about music... trying to find words that will enthuse others... or gently bends their ear a certain way that allows them to appreciate something they hitherto hadn't quite.