Composers you don't get

[EigenUser]

I never got Haydn. I do like some of his piano trios but he generally never stuck with me. I'm not listening to this period much now so I doubt I'll have a chance to try again soon. Maybe some day. I still haven't gotten very far with Ligeti. I've been loving Xenakis lately and, in a way, Ligeti seems like just small a step sideways. But I think It will come. Is there a thread for "famous compositions you don't get"? I like Cage but can't for the life of me get his etudes. I really tried to get into Scriabin but It just never stuck. I made a big effort!

As much as I love him now, Ligeti was work for me (which might be hard for GMG'ers to imagine). Clocks and Clouds was the only piece I loved immediately, and also perhaps the first two movements of the Piano Concerto. Movements 3 and 5 came about a year later and movement 4 was only a few months ago! I can now say that I love them all. Other works of his were like this as well. I still dislike the Cello Concerto, though. I come back to it now and again, but so far nothing has come out of it for me. Oddly, the similar Chamber Concerto is one of my favorites (that definitely took a while!).

A good friend of mine had the very unfortunate experience of having Aventures and Nouvelles Aventures be the first Ligeti works he heard. This was just after the time I first heard Clocks and Clouds and he showed me a YouTube sample performance of the BPO/Rattle playing the Aventures because it was so ridiculous. Two years later, he is finally starting to warm up, I think.

Please don't attack me for saying this (anyone), but I think that a big difference between Xenakis, (early) Penderecki, and Ligeti is that the former two are like "broad brushstrokes" on a canvas (more so Penderecki) whereas the latter is microscopically structured and more subtle. Neither one is better or worse at all. They were just doing different things and had different goals.

[Mandryka]

Interesting to see D Scarlatti and Haydn grouped together like this.

Both Scarlatti and Haydn wrote a lot of music, so to some extent it's quite hard to get the taste for their music because you have to separate the great stuff from the more mediocre. This requires quite a bit of effort and, in the case of Scarlatti, it may not be worth it unless you have a special interest in 17th century keyboard music. I also think that both of them suffer from radically wrong-headed perfomace styles: in the case of Scarlatti ones which are basically shallow bravura and nothing else, in the case of Haydn ones which make him sound a bit tame.

[Brian]

My favorite Ligeti is still the very early "Concert romanesc". That's the only Ligeti I'd let my parents listen to.

The Piano Trios have received their share of advocacy (from the likes of Charles Rosen) but are relatively infrequently performed because of the comparative lack of interest in the violin and cello parts. (they are basically enhanced piano sonatas, with the cello providing the bass and the violin taking over the cantabile melodies). I think they are on a level with the late symphonies and quartets in musical interest. The Concertos aren't as good. >.> Haydn's operas, sacred music (except the Creation and the Seasons & maybe one or two of the masses) and wind ensemble works are also quite underrated, as are the baryton trios & some of the keyboard works. Still, it's mostly the invention of the symphony and string quartet in their modern form that has led to Haydn's fame. With his quartets Opus 20 and 33, and the contemporaneous symphonies (40s, 50s, 60s) Haydn succeeded in elevating a domestic music genre and a glorified opera overture, respectively, to the level of the sublime, assimilating the high drama of serious opera and the learned style of sacred music into a new style surpassing that of CPE Bach in depth and power... etc... etc. His other works were less influential, Mozart's concertos were a more significant model on succeeding generations for instance, Beethoven's piano sonatas broke the mold of the educational pieces Mozart and Haydn and CPE had contributed while simultaneously destroying the musical language that had made their creation possible, and so forth.

5-star post here.

[71 dB]

Check out Domenico's Stabat Mater a 10 voci from the video I posted above.

Good stuff, a bit too 16th-century-like for a work composed in early 18th century. That kind of polyphonic carpet can be a bit ponderous. Alessandro's music is airy, beautiful and dramatic:

http://youtu.be/uFjxmHqNtyA (I can't make the flash work)

[DavidW]

Why are Haydn's Symphonies and String Quartets so popular while his Concertos and Piano Trios etc. aren't? Weird.

I like the piano trios, but find that only the late ones really have that wow!  I'm not a big fan of Mozart's PTs either.  The PTs don't really start for me until Beethoven.

As for the concertos I love the cello concertos, but not a huge fan of the other concertos.  I think that Mozart is king here, and I also like Boccherini and the sons of Bach at least as much as Haydn in the concertos.

I forgot that you are a fan of Ditters.

[EigenUser]

My favorite Ligeti is still the very early "Concert romanesc". That's the only Ligeti I'd let my parents listen to.

Concert Romanesc is a great piece. It doesn't have the qualities in his music that I like so much about him and his style/voice, but I enjoy it a lot.

My parents actually liked the violin concerto when I played it for them, which surprises me. Even more surprising is that my dad really liked the Requiem. I was positive he wouldn't.

The piano etudes are not too "modern" at all. Considering the kind of stuff that has been written in the past, say, 70 years, they are extremely tame -- yet they are each like a puzzle at the same time. Also extremely well-written. I'm a big fan of Fanfares (etude No. 4). I'm sure I'm wrong, but I don't see why anyone who likes jazz wouldn't at least appreciate Fanfares. If slowed down slightly and orchestrated for a small jazz ensemble, most parts of it would be convincing jazz club music.

[milk]

I do find his piano concertos enjoyable enough as an alternative to Mozart's. I admit I never tried very hard with the Symphonies or SQs. I did make an effort with the genre I like: keyboard music in in general and it just never stuck with me. It doesn't offend me.

But for composers I really don't get I guess Scarlatti is the one. Haydn is fine I guess. I just don't love it. But Scarlatti, I really tried hard and failed.

Darn it! I meant to say Scriabin not Scarlatti. I'm sorry.

[milk]

Assuming you mean Domenico, not his father Alessandro, this is a beauty, and probably not something most associate with him.
https://www.youtube.com/v/bZrYxbOTUq4

I'm really sorry I had a metal burp. It's Scriabin that I tried hard with and failed. I like Scarlatti sometimes. But I don't love him. I really feel bad to write the wrong thing and have people react to that. I'm sorry about that. I tried really hard wit Scriabin because so many people see him as a genius and have been influenced by him. But nothing ever really stuck with me. I still think I might come back around some day. I bought a bunch of Scriabin recordings and listened to.

[milk]

As much as I love him now, Ligeti was work for me (which might be hard for GMG'ers to imagine). Clocks and Clouds was the only piece I loved immediately, and also perhaps the first two movements of the Piano Concerto. Movements 3 and 5 came about a year later and movement 4 was only a few months ago! I can now say that I love them all. Other works of his were like this as well. I still dislike the Cello Concerto, though. I come back to it now and again, but so far nothing has come out of it for me. Oddly, the similar Chamber Concerto is one of my favorites (that definitely took a while!).

A good friend of mine had the very unfortunate experience of having Aventures and Nouvelles Aventures be the first Ligeti works he heard. This was just after the time I first heard Clocks and Clouds and he showed me a YouTube sample performance of the BPO/Rattle playing the Aventures because it was so ridiculous. Two years later, he is finally starting to warm up, I think.

Please don't attack me for saying this (anyone), but I think that a big difference between Xenakis, (early) Penderecki, and Ligeti is that the former two are like "broad brushstrokes" on a canvas (more so Penderecki) whereas the latter is microscopically structured and more subtle. Neither one is better or worse at all. They were just doing different things and had different goals.

I like Clocks and Clouds. I just don't find myself going back and back to Ligeti yet. Once I started on Xenakis, I couldn't stop. I don't know why Ligeti didn't have that effect because I like much of it. Part of me thinks that if one loves Xenakis one should love Ligeti too. They're not that different. I mean they are different but they're both geniuses playing in the same kind of field, even though much of what they actually do concerns different elements of music. I love Feldman also and snyprrr pointed out a connection that I think is more apparent on a deeper level.

[milk]

Yes .. Ligeti is a very sophisticated, cogent  & disciplined composer of unique, forensic rhythmic & harmonic detail, subtlety & nuance, vast amounts of harmonic & rhythmic information .. there is a lot more going on beneath the surface.

Ligeti seems more operatic to me. I guess I'm drawn more to the spectral stuff. Maybe there is a lot of nuance to Ligeti that I will pick up when I go back to it. I do like it. It hasen't obsessed me like Feldman or Xenakis but I definitely will be listening more. But, like I said, there is something operatic-sounding to me...dramatic, religious. I think I've been on a kick where I'm drawn to music that sounds like the natural world, if that makes sense. Ligeti seems more about humanity. More ironic.

[milk]

I'm really sorry again about writing the wrong name. I think it'll be a long time until I approach Scriabin again. But I'll be onto Ligeti again soon. I do like Clocks and Clouds, Lux, Lontano...The concertos haven't made any impact on me at all yet.

[EigenUser]

I'm really sorry again about writing the wrong name. I think it'll be a long time until I approach Scriabin again. But I'll be onto Ligeti again soon. I do like Clocks and Clouds, Lux, Lontano...The concertos haven't made any impact on me at all yet.

Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on Messiaen?

[71 dB]

I don't have anything by Ligeti. Started to listen his String Quartets on Spotify (Parker Quartet/Naxos). Post war composers are often a bit mystery for me, hard to figure out what they are doing with their music.

[milk]

Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on Messiaen?

I only have "Quatuor pour la fin du temps" and I haven't given it enough listens. I know Xenakis was a student, was Ligeti also? I acquired it before I was really fully interested in modern music, so I suppose it's something else I might enjoy spending time with now.
However, I'm not sure I'd like his solo piano stuff.
Before I got into modern music I was so focused on keyboard music. But now, when it comes to pushing boundaries, I find myself less interested in "avant garde" solo piano stuff, with some exceptions like Cage's prepared piano music and Feldman's pieces. I love Xenakis but took his solo piano pieces off my playlists. I know Ligeti's etudes are much praised.   

[not edward]

My parents actually liked the violin concerto when I played it for them, which surprises me.

One of my favourite concert experiences was at the Edinburgh Festival in 2000, when Christian Tetzlaff played the Ligeti violin concerto with the LSO under Boulez. Absolutely fantastic performance, but one of the things that really stuck out was this little old lady coming up to me at the interval, saying "I didn't know modern music could be like that!" and asking me if there were any recordings of the piece.

I think the violin concerto's a great introduction to Ligeti; it's got pretty much everything (including good tunes).

[bwv 1080]

but the violin concerto does not sound much like the rest of Ligeti's music, just go watch the overture to 2001: A Space Odyssey

https://www.youtube.com/v/r94mPZAapQA

[not edward]

but the violin concerto does not sound much like the rest of Ligeti's music, just go watch the overture to 2001: A Space Odyssey

https://www.youtube.com/v/r94mPZAapQA

I think it's a pretty good summary of his late style... his second period is of course a different kettle of (micropolyphonic) fish.

[Ken B]

Darn it! I meant to say Scriabin not Scarlatti. I'm sorry.

... but the bombers are beyond the recall point.

[bwv 1080]

I think it's a pretty good summary of his late style... his second period is of course a different kettle of (micropolyphonic) fish.

I would argue the Piano Concerto is more representative of Late Ligeti - the Violin Concerto lacks the African polyrhythms that Ligeti got interested in late in his life

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

One of my favourite concert experiences was at the Edinburgh Festival in 2000, when Christian Tetzlaff played the Ligeti violin concerto with the LSO under Boulez.

Interestingly I heard this exact same combo do this exact same piece in Carnegie Hall earlier in 2000. It was part of a 4-concert Boulez-led mini-fest, with Bartok's Wooden Prince on the second half.

I think the violin concerto's a great introduction to Ligeti; it's got pretty much everything (including good tunes).

Yeah, the tune that opens the 2nd mvt. is one that he apparently liked a lot and kept going back to. It first appears, as far as I know, in Musica ricercata back in the 1950s.