1950 to 2000

[Karl Henning]

Aye, I especially agree on the Concerto for piano and strings!

[Karl Henning]

Morton Feldman: Why Patterns? (1978)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVj0TNFX3u8

Love that piece.

[North Star]

Boulez: Le marteau sans maître (1953-7)
Tippett: Fantasia Concertante on a Theme of Corelli (1953)
Finzi: Cello Concerto (1955)
Stravinsky: Agon (1954–57)
Britten: Nocturne, Op. 60 (1958)

Martinů: Nonet (1959)
Villa-Lobos: Floresta do Amazonas (1959)
Ligeti: Atmosphères (1961)
Stevenson: Passacaglia on DSCH (1960-1962)
Hartmann: Symphony no. 8 (1962)

Messiaen: Et exspecto resurrectionem mortuorum (1964)
Scelsi: Uaxuctum (1966)
Shostakovich: Symphony No. 14 (1969) 
Holmboe: Chamber Symphony No. 3, op. 103a "Frise" (1969-70)
Dutilleux: Ainsi la nuit (1976)
Xenakis: Dikhthas (for vln & pno) (1979)

Lutosławski: Symphony No. 3 (1981–83)
Schnittke: Concerto for Mixed Chorus (1984–85)
Pärt: Stabat Mater (1985)
Carter: String Quartet No. 4 (1986)
Tavener: The Protecting Veil (1988)

Finnissy: Gershwin Arrangements (1975–88)
Takemitsu: A String around Autumn (1989)
Bryars: After the Requiem (1990)
Kurtág: ΣΤΗΛΗ (Stele) (1994)
Romitelli: Professor Bad Trip: Lesson I (1998)

[vandermolen]

Vaughan Williams: Symphony No. 9
Allan Pettersson: Violin concerto No. 2
Shostakovich symphonies 10 and 11
Miaskovsky: Symphony 27 (cheating here as he completed it in 1949)
Kalabis Symphony 2 'Sinfonia Pacis'
Williamson: Symphony 1 'Elevamini''
Bliss: Meditationson a Theme by John Blow
Vaughan Williams: Violin Sonata
Vasks: Symphony No. 2
Havergal Brian: Symphony 10
Honegger: Symphony 5
Richard Arnell: Symphony 5

[Karl Henning]

Hindemith: Organ Concerto (1962-63)

http://www.youtube.com/v/zxW9DmTy2Sw

http://www.youtube.com/v/dZh7YcfYUWw

http://www.youtube.com/v/ouEXj0z1Xhw

[Karl Henning]

Glad to be of service!

[not edward]

Boris Blacher ~ Konzertstück (1963)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVImoDcLnV8

Bio at Boosey & Hawkes website.

Nice catch.

Blacher's one of those composers who slips constantly under my radar, even though I'm almost never disappointed when I hear his music.

[jochanaan]

In no particular order:

Robert Suderburg: Piano Concerto "within the mirror of time" (1974)  I couldn't find it on YouTube, sadly...

Edgard Varèse: Déserts, Poème Electronique (1954, 1958)

Alan Hovhaness: Symphony #2 "Mysterious Mountain", #50 "Mount St. Helens" (1955, 1982)

Dmitri Shostakovich: Symphonies #10, #11, #13, #14 (1954-1969)

Steve Reich: "Clapping Music" (1972)  I heard this performed at the University of Colorado in Boulder a dozen years ago or so, by 12 composition students.  So simple yet so hypnotic!

Michael Daugherty: "UFO" percussion concerto (1999) The Evelyn Glennie recording rocks!

There are lots of others, but these are the ones that come to mind now.

[Artem]

Morton Feldman - For Bunita Marcus (1985)

[cjvinthechair]

Manuel Hidalgo ~ Einfache Musik

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=139WIGHVpo0

Spanish composer Manuel Hidalgo was born in the Andalusian town of Antequera in 1956. He initially studied theory and composition with Juan-Alfonso García, the organist at the Cathedral of Grenada; from 1976 to 1979 he studied composition with Hans Ulrich Lehmann at the Zurich Conservatory, after which he went on to study with Helmut Lachenmann from 1979 to 1984—first in Hannover and then in Stuttgart.

Since 1981, Manuel Hidalgo has lived in Stuttgart as a freelance composer.

Gee...if that's 'einfach', hate to think what's considered 'schwierig' !

[EigenUser]

Most of what I like is stuff from the first half of the 20th century (Bartok, Ravel, Debussy, Gershwin, some Stravinsky), but I've been finding some really great music from the 2nd half as well over the past few years. To name a few (in no particular order):

Ligeti: Lontano, Clocks and Clouds, San Francisco Polyphony, Piano Concerto, Violin Concerto, Horn Concerto (I'm intentionally not including Atmospheres -- I don't mind it, but I also don't see what is so great about it)
Messiaen: Et Exspecto Resurrectionem Mortuorum (new to me, but I like it)
Ades: Asyla (thanks to a member of this forum!)
Reich: Music for 18 Musicians, The Desert Music (the latter seems to be considered "bad taste" by several hardcore Reich fans, but I kind of like it)
Stravinsky: Agon (I tend to like early Stravinsky best, but this piece is too much fun and too comical for me not to like)

I generally dislike dodecaphonic/serial music (Agon is really the one exception, but this is only in a few sections and I have a hard time noticing).

[Mirror Image]

Most of what I like is stuff from the first half of the 20th century (Bartok, Ravel, Debussy, Gershwin, some Stravinsky), but I've been finding some really great music from the 2nd half as well over the past few years. To name a few (in no particular order):

Ligeti: Lontano, Clocks and Clouds, San Francisco Polyphony, Piano Concerto, Violin Concerto, Horn Concerto (I'm intentionally not including Atmospheres -- I don't mind it, but I also don't see what is so great about it)
Messiaen: Et Exspecto Resurrectionem Mortuorum (new to me, but I like it)
Ades: Asyla (thanks to a member of this forum!)
Reich: Music for 18 Musicians, The Desert Music (the latter seems to be considered "bad taste" by several hardcore Reich fans, but I kind of like it)
Stravinsky: Agon (I tend to like early Stravinsky best, but this piece is too much fun and too comical for me not to like)

I generally dislike dodecaphonic/serial music (Agon is really the one exception, but this is only in a few sections and I have a hard time noticing).

Have you ever seriously sat down and listened to say, for example, Schoenberg's Five Pieces for Orchestra? How about Berg's Violin Concerto? I think you would find so much ingenuity and emotion in these works if you put your guard down.

[EigenUser]

Have you ever seriously sat down and listened to say, for example, Schoenberg's Five Pieces for Orchestra? How about Berg's Violin Concerto? I think you would find so much ingenuity and emotion in these works if you put your guard down.

I'm listening to "Five Pieces for Orchestra" right now and I'm not sure what to make of it. I like the rhythmic drive of the first piece, but I still didn't really take to it. I've heard parts of Berg's violin concerto before and I liked that a little better. I think that if I were to appreciate one of the composers from the second Viennese school, it would be Berg. Perhaps in time I will. In the meantime, I do love Schoenberg's "Verklarte Nacht".

Part of my aversion of dodecaphonic music is due to the total serialism that followed in the 1950s (*cough* Stockhausen *cough*). This music I really dislike. I don't argue that these guys didn't know what they were doing -- just that I don't like the sound or the philosophy of writing music in this kind of mathematical way. It seems to be so devoid of emotion; cold and calculated. Don't get me wrong -- I love math. I have to love math, as I recently graduated from college in Mechanical Engineering. I just think that music should be based off of an artistic intuition as opposed to the algorithmic methods used in total serialism. I think that this is one reason I take to Ligeti so well -- he was highly influenced by math (he went to the conservatory only after being rejected by a science academy in Budapest because he was Jewish), but he doesn't often lose his artistic intuition. The result is music that is modern, dissonant, sometimes chaotic -- but always human.

P.S. According to the Firefox spell-checker, "dodecaphonic", "serialism", and "Ligeti" are not words ("Schoenberg" and "Stockhausen" are, however). This is changing now (right clicks, "Add to dictionary")  .

[kishnevi]

Maurice Ohana ~ Concerto for Cello and Orchestra, No. 2 | "In Dark and Blue" (1990)

https://www.youtube.com/v/95FRY2HbYJA

From Wiki:
Maurice Ohana (June 12, 1913 – November 13, 1992 in Paris) was an Anglo-French composer of Sephardic Jewish origin.

He originally studied architecture, but abandoned this in favour of a musical career, initially as a pianist. He studied under Alfredo Casella in Rome, returning to France in 1946. Around this time he founded the "Groupe Zodiaque", which fought against prevailing musical dogma. His mature musical style shows the influence of Mediterranean folk music, particularly the Andalusian cante jondo.

Ohana's output includes the choral works Office des Oracles and Avoaha (1992), three string quartets (1963, 1980, 1989), and two suites for ten-string guitar: Si le jour paraît... (1963) and Cadran lunaire (1981-2), as well as a Tiento for six-string guitar (1957). He also wrote operas entitled Syllabaire pour Phèdre and La Celestina.

He is also known for his extensive use of microtonality; for example, third- and quarter-tones in pieces like Le Tombeau de Debussy and Si le jour paraît.... He was influenced by the use of microintervals in the cante jondo.

Ohana rarely composed for large symphony orchestra: Synaxis (1966), Livre des Prodiges (1979) and T'Harân-Ngô (1973-1974). He composed two cello concertos, one piano concerto and a guitar concerto (1950–58; dedicated to Narciso Yepes).

Thank you. Ohana goes on the list of music to watch for.

[Mirror Image]

I'm listening to "Five Pieces for Orchestra" right now and I'm not sure what to make of it. I like the rhythmic drive of the first piece, but I still didn't really take to it. I've heard parts of Berg's violin concerto before and I liked that a little better. I think that if I were to appreciate one of the composers from the second Viennese school, it would be Berg. Perhaps in time I will. In the meantime, I do love Schoenberg's "Verklarte Nacht".

Part of my aversion of dodecaphonic music is due to the total serialism that followed in the 1950s (*cough* Stockhausen *cough*). This music I really dislike. I don't argue that these guys didn't know what they were doing -- just that I don't like the sound or the philosophy of writing music in this kind of mathematical way. It seems to be so devoid of emotion; cold and calculated. Don't get me wrong -- I love math. I have to love math, as I recently graduated from college in Mechanical Engineering. I just think that music should be based off of an artistic intuition as opposed to the algorithmic methods used in total serialism. I think that this is one reason I take to Ligeti so well -- he was highly influenced by math (he went to the conservatory only after being rejected by a science academy in Budapest because he was Jewish), but he doesn't often lose his artistic intuition. The result is music that is modern, dissonant, sometimes chaotic -- but always human.

P.S. According to the Firefox spell-checker, "dodecaphonic", "serialism", and "Ligeti" are not words ("Schoenberg" and "Stockhausen" are, however). This is changing now (right clicks, "Add to dictionary")  .

I can certainly sympathize with your position as I'm not fond of serialism in general, but I am fond of a serialism that has a 'humanizing force' which is a phrase Simon Rattle used to described Berg's music in his first episode in his series on 20th Century music titled Leaving Home. I think you would come to appreciate Berg and Schoenberg. Webern is a tougher sell for me as I do enjoy a few of his works like the Passacaglia for example. I think you would appreciate Dallapiccola, too, if you would give him a chance. If you don't know his music, he's basically an Italian exponent of the Second Viennese School. He wrote excellent, and accessible, music that I think any Ligeti fan would come to appreciate. I think once you loose that human connection in serialism, you loose me. I don't like Stockhausen at all. I do, however, like Xenakis or at least a few of his works anyway. I think a little Xenakis goes a long way, but I don't think his music is devoid of emotion at all. One listen to his orchestral work Hiketides would certainly help in changing your view I think. Another composer who I think you would enjoy and writes ultra-Modern music with a lot of emotion and feeling is Lutoslawski. Are you familiar with his music?

[amw]

Thank you. Ohana goes on the list of music to watch for.

Ohana's Mass is pretty good, as is Avoaha. Messiaen-ish, a bit, but a lot of French composers are like that I guess. The Erato box is probably your best starter kit assuming it's still in print.

[amw]

Part of my aversion of dodecaphonic music is due to the total serialism that followed in the 1950s (*cough* Stockhausen *cough*).

Side note: total serialism didn't last more than a few years. There's a lot of non-serial music by the likes of Stockhausen, Xenakis and Berio that is worth one's time, much of it dating from the 1960s—for instance from Stockhausen I quite like Mikrophonie I for six players at one tam-tam. It's better than it sounds. Sort of like what a rusted old abandoned ship would say if it could talk. Kontakte is similar, except people other than me actually like it. Gruppen is serial but can be very powerful, though needs to be heard live, or at least through surround. (Not as bad as Cosmic Pulses which makes pretty much no sense in stereo, but is supposed to be a great experience in octophony.) And later on there is some much more "accessible" and even jazz-influenced music, eg Michaels Reise with its Miles Davis-like obbligato trumpet, Ave, Freude, etc. You just have to look past Stockhausen's somewhat wacky religious and personal views, and the pants-on-head cultists who surround/ed him (James is nowhere near the craziest example).

[kishnevi]

Side note: total serialism didn't last more than a few years. There's a lot of non-serial music by the likes of Stockhausen, Xenakis and Berio that is worth one's time, much of it dating from the 1960s—for instance from Stockhausen I quite like Mikrophonie I for six players at one tam-tam. It's better than it sounds. Sort of like what a rusted old abandoned ship would say if it could talk. Kontakte is similar, except people other than me actually like it. Gruppen is serial but can be very powerful, though needs to be heard live, or at least through surround. (Not as bad as Cosmic Pulses which makes pretty much no sense in stereo, but is supposed to be a great experience in octophony.) And later on there is some much more "accessible" and even jazz-influenced music, eg Michaels Reise with its Miles Davis-like obbligato trumpet, Ave, Freude, etc. You just have to look past Stockhausen's somewhat wacky religious and personal views, and the pants-on-head cultists who surround/ed him (James is nowhere near the craziest example).

I'm not a fan of serialism and its offshoots/successors; the musical language doesn't connect with me, and in some cases actually gives me a headache.  but Stockhausen is a special case because of all the hype, much of it originating with him.  Take Gruppen (which I didn't like--but on the other hand I was listening to it on Youtube,  which obviously is far from ideal sonics) and similar works--the marriage of serialism and early Baroque polychoralism.   Yet if one takes the Stockhausen hype seriously,  it was a totally new phenomenon.  Nor am I impressed by the special choreography and costuming of some pieces.  If the total enjoyment of music demands me seeing two people prancing around in animal costumes (Tierkreis, I think--another Youtube experience)--well, I'd rather see a production of the Lion King.  Or the Cunning Little Vixen at least.

On the topic of the "Big Three" of the Second Viennese School,  I've found Schoenberg to be, usually,  too emotionally cold for me to enjoy his later music (earlier stuff like Verklarte Nacht I love), and some belongs to the headache inducing category (Pierrot Lunaire, for instance).   Berg on the other hand was able to include a high level of emotional warmth in his music, and while I don't love it,  I have a much easier time with it.  Webern is somewhere in the middle, although again  there's usually enough emotion to allow me to connect to it, if only in a tentative sort of way.

[amw]

I'm not a fan of serialism and its offshoots/successors; the musical language doesn't connect with me, and in some cases actually gives me a headache.  but Stockhausen is a special case because of all the hype, much of it originating with him.  Take Gruppen (which I didn't like--but on the other hand I was listening to it on Youtube,  which obviously is far from ideal sonics) and similar works--the marriage of serialism and early Baroque polychoralism.   Yet if one takes the Stockhausen hype seriously,  it was a totally new phenomenon.  Nor am I impressed by the special choreography and costuming of some pieces.  If the total enjoyment of music demands me seeing two people prancing around in animal costumes (Tierkreis, I think--another Youtube experience)--well, I'd rather see a production of the Lion King.  Or the Cunning Little Vixen at least.

I think one has to ignore the hype... and most of the choreography (rarely does it have any actual musical effect—perhaps in parts of Licht where the performers move around the audience, are suspended from the ceiling or in helicopters etc). I think a lot of the music stands up pretty well on its own, without knowing what's supposed to be happening during it—I have never seen the elaborate dance that the performers must engage in while playing Ave, or anything involved in a staging of Inori or Trans; can still enjoy them sometimes—but even for me a lot of it doesn't. I find the later bits of Klang somewhat ridiculous for instance, not least due to the constant accompaniment of Kathinka Pasveer intoning words like "Paradise" and "Urantia" and "Eternal Sun" in an unconvincingly campy voice.

I think the works from the 50s and 60s are likely to find the widest audience, in spite of the music itself being less conventionally beautiful (I myself strongly disliked Gruppen at first hearing), because the intellectual and emotional underpinnings are much less esoteric and comprehensible on repeated listening. It's still sort of music instead of Stockhausen's weird religion-thing. The later stuff shouldn't be overlooked though.

[some guy]

It seems to be so devoid of emotion; cold and calculated.

Very little music strikes me this way. Stockhausen not at all.

Nor Boulez nor Schoenberg nor Berg nor Webern for that matter.

Not sure what people are expecting to find but not finding or hoping to find but not finding. But neither dodecaphony nor serial music sounds any colder or more calculated than any other kind of music. Indeed, usually what people report as liking in Bruckner or Beethoven or Bach is the sense of control of the material that they hear. Or "hear." Sounds like calculation is a good thing if it's in music one likes but a bad thing if it's in music one doesn't like. Which means that calculation is definitely not the issue but whatever else it is that is making for liking or disliking. ("Cold" the same, just by the way. If it's Sibelius, then "cold" is high praise. If it's Babbitt, however, "cold" is a definite diss.)