Going back to the start.

[North Star]

My favorites are Gielen and Bertini.  Gielen like Boulez takes a modernist approach to Mahler, but unlike Boulez he never sounds dry to my ears.  Bertini is a straight laced almost classical interpretation.  While Gielen and Boulez might be bent towards modernism, Chailly and Levine towards romanticism (and Bernstein in his own little world)

I only know Gielen's 2nd & 3rd and Chailly's 5th, but they're certainly excellent. Wouldn't mind having their cycles..

I still have that experience with a chunk of Cage's music, esp. the non-pretty stuff.  Just this past year or so with an appreciable amount of Joan La Barbara's SINGING THROUGH collection.  Also, further back, with Eberhard Blum's recording of SIXTY TWO MESOSTICS RE MERCE CUNNINGHAM.  I think glossolalia might be a generic stumbling block for me, with exceptions.  (Robbie Basho.) 
But recitative used to be a problem for me, as well; I cannot now relate to that old me.

I was going to say that spiky (~post-)~serialism tended to generate problems for me, but that has been contradicted by some listening I've done and quite naturally gotten into over the past several months. 
I think my portable nervous complaint has tilted me from spiky to smoove in terms of disposition, over just the past several years.  Not a general proposition, though.  I think I dislike authority a lot more than dissonance.  And the exceptions are often worth the irritations.  The Cage/La Barbara mentioned above is one thing, but then I will put on Ami Yoshida after several years' hiatus and it's magic.  Or I will think I am fed up with, say, "serialism"; but then I will hear some Barraque or Webern or Babbitt or any number of those guys, and it is jammin'.

Good to read that I'm not alone (as if I would have thought that I was the only person on the planet who isn't a fan) in struggling with at least some of it.

Would you care to expand on the idea of 'authority', and what problems you have with it?
Serialism in itself isn't really a problem to me, even if I don't want to listen to it all the time, and I certainly don't like all serialist music. Dallapiccola is the some of the fruitiest jam of them all. 

[DavidW]

I struggled with Bartok back when I was in college.  I had a recording of Concerto for Orchestra performed by Boulez.  I thought it was dull, flat, boring.  I didn't discover how awesome Bartok is until I heard his string quartets performed by the Takacs Quartet.

[DavidW]

I only know Gielen's 2nd & 3rd and Chailly's 5th, but they're certainly excellent. Wouldn't mind having their cycles..

And they compliment each other well!

[Philo]

@North Star
I think your opinion is valid. I'm most pleased you're giving him a fair shake.

@Octave
Glad to hear you'll be joining us in the new. I feel contemporary classical has the most interesting sound.

@edward
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

@DavidW
Not Bartok? Glad to hear about your reversal. His Piano Concertos are so wonderful.

[Pat B]

Nice on both fronts. I'd give you the same recommendation as I gave to the others: Boulez conducting Mahler Symphony No. 3.

I haven't heard Boulez's 3rd. Obviously it worked for you, but I think any 3rd is an unconventional recommendation for "unlocking" Mahler.

For Mahler newbies who enjoy Beethoven and Dvořák more than Berg and Shostakovich, my recommendation is the 1st. It's relatively modest in scope, very tuneful, and nobody breaks out into song. If pressed for a specific recording, I'd say Kubelik (either DG or Audite), but it might be better to borrow whatever recording you can get from a friend or library.

More than anything, don't force it.

[NJ Joe]

Hater.



Have you tried HIP? Seriously for Haydn there is nothing like the Hogwood set or the Kuijken or Weil/Tafelmusik other HIP stuff.

For Mozart there are only really 4 major symphonies. The rest are on a much lower plane. In traditional performances I like Bohm as first choice by a lot. For HIP Pinnock or Hoggy again.

This disc changed my thinking on Mozart symphonies.  If they're on a lower plane, I fail to hear it.

[NJ Joe]

I can definitely see where you're coming from on this. For me it wasn't really until I heard Boulez conducting his Third Symphony that I began to truly appreciate him.

I own this recording and have listened to it maybe twice.  I shall pursue it in earnest this weekend. I've been listening to Lenny's NYPO set most of the time, and I do enjoy his 3rd.

[Philo]

I haven't heard Boulez's 3rd. Obviously it worked for you, but I think any 3rd is an unconventional recommendation for "unlocking" Mahler.

Admittedly it is a personal bias of mine, but I suspect anyone who has posted in this thread isn't a newbie of any sort.

I own this recording and have listened to it maybe twice.  I shall pursue it in earnest this weekend. I've been listening to Lenny's NYPO set most of the time, and I do enjoy his 3rd.

You'll have to return to give us all a report. :-)

[torut]

I thought Haydn was boring, but Adam Fischer's symphonies and Buchberger Quartet's string quartets completely changed my mind. The piano trios, piano sonatas, baryton trios, oratorios, all so good and far from boring.

I heard some of John Cage's music a long time ago, thought he was just the man of idea, and the realization of his idea into music was not significant, like some conceptual art. But recently I heard his works from different periods (early works, melodious works, chance operation and late number pieces), inspired by GMG Cage thread, and I started liking them very much.

I am struggling with Morton Feldman's music. I have about 10 albums, but I rarely become in the mood of hearing them, and even if I start playing it, sometimes I stop it after a while. I don't know why.

Mahler is most mentioned here. I liked his music from the beginning.

The opening of the 5th is probably still my favorite opening of any symphony ever.

Me too. The symphony No. 5 by Kubelik & Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra on Audite was the first Mahler disc I heard, and the trumpet at the opening was so amazing. Another favorite is No. 7 by Tennstedt & LPO.

[Philo]

I thought Haydn was boring, but Adam Fischer's symphonies and Buchberger Quartet's string quartets completely changed my mind. The piano trios, piano sonatas, baryton trios, oratorios, all so good and far from boring.

I heard some of John Cage's music a long time ago, thought he was just the man of idea, and the realization of his idea into music was not significant, like some conceptual art. But recently I heard his works from different periods (early works, melodious works, chance operation and late number pieces), inspired by GMG Cage thread, and I started liking them very much.

I am struggling with Morton Feldman's music. I have about 10 albums, but I rarely become in the mood of hearing them, and even if I start playing it, sometimes I stop it after a while. I don't know why.

Thanks for your thoughts. In regards to Feldman, have you heard his Samuel Beckett piece? I always thought that was an interesting listen.

[Octave]

I thought Haydn was boring, but Adam Fischer's symphonies and Buchberger Quartet's string quartets completely changed my mind. The piano trios, piano sonatas, baryton trios, oratorios, all so good and far from boring.

Yes, this....though I think I'd warmed up to Haydn maybe a few years or so before first hearing any of the Fischers/Buchbergers.  I just cannot now relate to why I'd have felt that way.   I toted around that Jochum set of LONDONs for years and just thought it was tidy, polite music.  I didn't even respect the music enough to summon some genuine rancor towards it.*
The first time I remember being excited about Haydn was when I heard Brendel's piano sonatas collection; but as good as those are, I don't think it was Brendel who initiated me into the pleasures of that music or of Haydn generally.  It just "popped" into place.  Listening to Bernstein's recordings (mainly the symphonies) just a few years ago was a notable, audible "popping", wherein the Geiger counter started clicking.  Still not sure what proportion were Haydn, me, and Lenny.  Since then, it's been a lot more about the recordings I have heard, I think; and me listening more closely and with more devotion. 
I do think it might be as much or more about belief as about "recognition" or "admission" of greatness or something similarly sterile.

* belated edit: I am almost certain my feelings towards Haydn were unrelated to the Jochum recordings....I mean no such connection here.

[DaveF]

It's a pity David Cairns doesn't post on this forum (or does he?) since he has said (in the preface to his translation of the Memoirs, if I remember right) that the first time he heard Berlioz it made absolutely no sense to him.

[torut]

Thanks for your thoughts. In regards to Feldman, have you heard his Samuel Beckett piece? I always thought that was an interesting listen.

I got Klangforum Wien's on Kairos recently and heard only a couple of times. I am going to hear it again. Thank you for your suggestion.

[torut]

Yes, this....though I think I'd warmed up to Haydn maybe a few years or so before first hearing any of the Fischers/Buchbergers.  I just cannot now relate to why I'd have felt that way.   I toted around that Jochum set of LONDONs for years and just thought it was tidy, polite music.  I didn't even respect the music enough to summon some genuine rancor towards it.
The first time I remember being excited about Haydn was when I heard Brendel's piano sonatas collection; but as good as those are, I don't think it was Brendel who initiated me into the pleasures of that music or of Haydn generally.  It just "popped" into place.  Listening to Bernstein's recordings (mainly the symphonies) just a few years ago was a notable, audible "popping", wherein the Geiger counter started clicking.  Still not sure what proportion were Haydn, me, and Lenny.  Since then, it's been a lot more about the recordings I have heard, I think; and me listening more closely and with more devotion. 
I do think it might be as much or more about belief as about "recognition" or "admission" of greatness or something similarly sterile.

Yes, it is interesting how it works. I tried few symphonies and SQs before, and they didn't leave much impression on me. But after seeing many praises of Haydn at some blogs/forum, I decided to try it again, and I was very moved by discs such as SQ by Quatuor Mosaiques & L'Archibudelli and piano sonatas by Derzhavina, then I bought Brilliant Classics's Haydn Edition. There are so many works in each genre, but they don't tire me at all. I prefer clean & less vibrato playings, so probably these performances just worked for me. Now, also, I became to like Beethoven's early opuses (Op. 18, Op. 1, etc.) I liked Beethoven always, but didn't pay attention to his early works.

[jochanaan]

I struggled with Bartok back when I was in college.  I had a recording of Concerto for Orchestra performed by Boulez.  I thought it was dull, flat, boring.  I didn't discover how awesome Bartok is until I heard his string quartets performed by the Takacs Quartet.

Yeah, that would do it!  If you still struggle with the Concerto for Orchestra, try the legendary Reiner/Chicago recording (Are there any Reiner/CSO recordings that aren't legendary?) or the 1950s Ormandy/Philadelphia one.

Back in my teen years, I started with an obsession with Bach and Mozart. I thought that Beethoven and the Romantics would be "too heavy" since they used larger orchestras. Fortunately that blind prejudice didn't survive first acquaintance with the Eroica and Ninth Symphonies.

I've observed about Mahler that people either love his music at once or always struggle with it. No long slow process of getting acquainted, no mild likes; either total love at first hearing or constant warfare.

[Ken B]

Yeah, that would do it!  If you still struggle with the Concerto for Orchestra, try the legendary Reiner/Chicago recording (Are there any Reiner/CSO recordings that aren't legendary?) or the 1950s Ormandy/Philadelphia one.

Back in my teen years, I started with an obsession with Bach and Mozart. I thought that Beethoven and the Romantics would be "too heavy" since they used larger orchestras. Fortunately that blind prejudice didn't survive first acquaintance with the Eroica and Ninth Symphonies.

I've observed about Mahler that people either love his music at once or always struggle with it. No long slow process of getting acquainted, no mild likes; either total love at first hearing or constant warfare.

Not me for Mahler. Love at first sight followed by .... A clearer view of his virtues shall we say 

[Sergeant Rock]

This disc changed my thinking on Mozart symphonies.  If they're on a lower plane...

They aren't. Szell, Cleveland, Mozart...they are the pinnacle. As a critic said of that combination in the 60s, they were the best Mozart/Haydn/Beethoven band in the world.

Sarge

[DavidW]

Yeah, that would do it!  If you still struggle with the Concerto for Orchestra, try the legendary Reiner/Chicago recording (Are there any Reiner/CSO recordings that aren't legendary?) or the 1950s Ormandy/Philadelphia one.

Back when I was a gmg or cmg noob you or someone else rec'd that very recording (Reiner/CSO) and that did the trick.  A masterful performance in great sound.

[Karl Henning]

I love such stories!

[Bogey]

They aren't. Szell, Cleveland, Mozart...they are the pinnacle. As a critic said of that combination in the 60s, they were the best Mozart/Haydn/Beethoven band in the world.

Sarge

Yup.  I would nudge them over Herbie and the BPO because of the Haydn and over Lenny and whoever because of the LvB.  As a "whole package" I believe you nailed it.  Hmmm, makes me want to ask a new question.