Top10 compositions that you don't like but everyone else does

[Ken B]

Agreed. Personally, it is important to me that I educate myself on music whether I like it or not. Besides, lots of times it ends up growing on me. I started out detesting Stockhausen, but even I have found a few works that I like and I approach him with a much different attitude than, say, six months ago.

I was talking not so much about the serious classical listeners, but more about the occasional concert-goers. You know, today you might mention the name Bartok and someone might respond along the lines of "Oh, I remember seeing that name on the program of classical concert at the Kennedy Center a few years ago." That sort of thing.
True. Out of the two of them, Stockhausen was the pioneer for sure. While I don't listen or know much about rock and more popular music, it has always fascinated me how many artists of these genres admired him.

Indeed, we all remember the pioneers of painting theory, and forget Rembrandt, Monet, or Chagal, who merely painted good works. Theorists first, theorists foremost.

[EigenUser]

Even concert models & venues will expand with time, involving more and more technology in their genesis. Generations of listeners will continuously turnover with time too, people more and more deeply connected to this technological world. The great art of the past lives but the demand for bold, deep, challenging intelligent art will never go away either. There are festivals that ONLY feature electronic art music these days where traditional programming, venues and art of the distant past play no role, the demographic is almost completely different .. its like a giant field and culture of it's own, and if you look hard enough traces of it are found everywhere.

I really, really hope that you are right. I've said this before, but I am sick of being disappointed every year in the Spring when checking out local symphony orchestra programs. It seems like every year every major orchestra is having an "all-Mozart" concert and then they talk about it like no one has ever done it before. What a waste of programming space! Not at all that Mozart isn't fine music (though not now for me) -- just that there is so much out there!

[Ken B]

I really, really hope that you are right. I've said this before, but I am sick of being disappointed every year in the Spring when checking out local symphony orchestra programs. It seems like every year every major orchestra is having an "all-Mozart" concert and then they talk about it like no one has ever done it before. What a waste of programming space! Not at all that Mozart isn't fine music (though not now for me) -- just that there is so much out there!

Yes. And really it's foolish for the local orchestra to do nothing but warhorses, because they could never really compete with the best commercial recordings. I've spoken to local music directors on a few occasions and tried to push on them approachable music from the 20th century, such as Virgil Thomson, or other pieces which are less often performed suitable for small orchestras and something that people would like to listen to. They are reacting to audiences who are reacting to decades of teaching by the institutional avant garde, that music should be painful to listen to. One Boulez is enough to teach most people to avoid modern music.
This by the way shows the folly of much public funding of modern music. The music which gets subsidies is music no one wants to hear. It gets played, because it is subsidized, and poisons the well.
When I lived in Kingston Ontario the local orchestra had a pretty adventurous program, but we had a very highly admired music director, Alexander Brott, and for a small semiprofessional orchestra could pull in famous soloists such as Ida Haendel, Paul Doktor, Peter Pears, David Oistrakh, or Janos Starker, all of whom I saw there.

[EigenUser]

Yes. And really it's foolish for the local orchestra to do nothing but warhorses, because they could never really compete with the best commercial recordings. I've spoken to local music directors on a few occasions and tried to push on them approachable music from the 20th century, such as Virgil Thomson, or other pieces which are less often performed suitable for small orchestras and something that people would like to listen to. They are reacting to audiences who are reacting to decades of teaching by the institutional avant garde, that music should be painful to listen to. One Boulez is enough to teach most people to avoid modern music.
This by the way shows the folly of much public funding of modern music. The music which gets subsidies is music no one wants to hear. It gets played, because it is subsidized, and poisons the well.
When I lived in Kingston Ontario the local orchestra had a pretty adventurous program, but we had a very highly admired music director, Alexander Brott, and for a small semiprofessional orchestra could pull in famous soloists such as Ida Haendel, Paul Doktor, Peter Pears, David Oistrakh, or Janos Starker, all of whom I saw there.

But even I have found some works in by Boulez to be very enjoyable. If I can, surely others can, too. Not to mention more approachable works that you are talking about. There is nothing wrong with having Haydn and Messiaen share a program. Or to pick two composers I don't care for, Mozart and, say, Lachenmann (even so, I'd be interested in attending such a concert, by the way). Why must it be all one (old) or the other (new)? Of course the old is going to win if that is the case since it has stood the test of time.

[Jay F]

Since I no longer own them -- I sold and gave away many, many CDs (and even more books) before a move -- I don't know their names, but they are all by Haydn. And let's just agree they're ones everyone else likes.

[The Six]

I've listened to the Chopin Nocturnes over and over trying to give them a chance, but I just don't hear anything I really like.

[North Star]

I've listened to the Chopin Nocturnes over and over trying to give them a chance, but I just don't hear anything I really like.

But you like other Chopin, right? Have you heard period instrument performances of them?

[NLK1971]

Bruckner bowed down to Mahler, etc...

I presume this confuses Mahler and Wagner.

I basically agree with your larger point, but composers (or people in general) don't necessarily grasp where they stand. From what I have read (admittedly not much), Bruckner seems to have badly underestimated his own work.

As Schoenzeler says in his biography (p58):
"...when one considers that, with the exception of the Symphony No. 2, Bruckner never heard a performance of any of his symphonies before starting work on the next, and moreover that the date marking the beginning of composition of one symphony coincides fairly closely with the completion date of its precursor, there can be no doubt about the unshakeable faith which Bruckner had in his vocation as a symphonist.  All idle talk about his 'uncertainty' and 'lack of self-assurance' must be silenced by these facts."

[Pat B]

As Schoenzeler says in his biography (p58):
"...when one considers that, with the exception of the Symphony No. 2, Bruckner never heard a performance of any of his symphonies before starting work on the next, and moreover that the date marking the beginning of composition of one symphony coincides fairly closely with the completion date of its precursor, there can be no doubt about the unshakeable faith which Bruckner had in his vocation as a symphonist.  All idle talk about his 'uncertainty' and 'lack of self-assurance' must be silenced by these facts."

Again, I don't claim to be any sort of expert on Bruckner. But the fact that he didn't take time off between works doesn't prove or even imply anything about his self-confidence.

[NLK1971]

Again, I don't claim to be any sort of expert on Bruckner. But the fact that he didn't take time off between works doesn't prove or even imply anything about his self-confidence.

I think it's evidence of his single-mindedness; the kind of strength-of-purpose characteristic of the genius.  I don't believe it makes sense to attribute lack of self-confidence to someone like this.  Where he may have lacked confidence is in regard to how his music would be received by others.

Schoenzeler:
"That Bruckner was absolutely sure of himself even when he did give in to the well-meaning advice and insistence of his friends is shown quite clearly by what he said on many occasions: that his symphonies as he had written them were meant for 'times to come'..."

[Pat B]

I think it's evidence of his single-mindedness; the kind of strength-of-purpose characteristic of the genius.  I don't believe it makes sense to attribute lack of self-confidence to someone like this.  Where he may have lacked confidence is in regard to how his music would be received by others.

Fair enough.

[RebLem]

1) Vivaldi: all the concerti except Four Seasons.  I do love the Four Seasons, however, esp. Winter, and especially the middle movement.  Lots of his choral works, however, are very good.

2) Mozart: Die Zauberflote--just not into all the Masonic symbolism.

3) Brahms: Piano Concerto 1.

4) Bruch: Violin Concerto 1.

5) Bartok: String Quartets.

6) Walton: Symphony 1.

I can also identify certain works I like where I dislike some performances that lots of people like--the Mackerras set of the Mozart symphonies for example, all have such a sense of urgency that they sound like the conductor is perpetually concentrating on trying not to pee in his pants.  And the Karajan and Kempe recordings of Strauss's Metamorphosen are examples of a school of interpretation of that work which I despise.  I do, however, love the work as performed by Klemperer, Marriner, and Stamp.  These last sound very sad, like a man who is dying, who has just given up the will to live, who has lost everything that ever meant anything to him. 

[Jo498]

I do not dislike the four seasons, but I do not find them all that exceptional, so I cannot really understand that so many listeners seem to single them out musically. I have only heard a fraction of Vivaldi's concerti, but there are certainly several dozen that are as interesting and well-crafted as the "seasons".

[Mirror Image]

I do not dislike the four seasons, but I do not find them all that exceptional, so I cannot really understand that so many listeners seem to single them out musically. I have only heard a fraction of Vivaldi's concerti, but there are certainly several dozen that are as interesting and well-crafted as the "seasons".

I feel similar to you. I think L'estro armonico may be my favorite set of Vivaldi concerti.

[ZauberdrachenNr.7]

I do not dislike the four seasons, but I do not find them all that exceptional, so I cannot really understand that so many listeners seem to single them out musically. I have only heard a fraction of Vivaldi's concerti, but there are certainly several dozen that are as interesting and well-crafted as the "seasons".

Agree with you and John, the Four Seasons have a charm and accessibility that makes them attractive to many, but when I think Vivaldi, I want the cello concertos, please.

[Jo498]

Some of my Vivaldi favorites are among the "concerti da camera" which are more like virtuoso trio or quattro sonatas. Or some crazy mixtures of molti'stromenti with bubbling chalumeaux and chirping mandolines. He might have occasionally composed "the same concerto"  a few times, but not a hundred times...

[vandermolen]

R Strauss 'Ein Heldenleben' (what a bore!  ) - I know you'll all agree.
Vaughan Williams: Serenade to Music and The Wasps Overture (and he is one of my very favourite composers)
Most music by Mozart apart from the Clarinet Concerto, PC 21 and the Requiem.
Prokofiev: Sinfonia Concertante for Cello and Orchestra
Verdi's operas
Rossini's operas
Scenes and Arias by Nicholas Maw
Walton's 'Facade'
Rodrigo's Guitar Concerto
Tchaikovsky Variations on a Rococo Theme (although I love his Pathetique Symphony)

[Karl Henning]

I liked Façade the first time I heard it, but it doesn't wear at all well.  It's cute the first couple of times . . . .

[Jo498]

R Strauss 'Ein Heldenleben' (what a bore!  ) - I know you'll all agree.

Quite. It may be a candidate for the converse thread.

Most music by Mozart apart from the Clarinet Concerto, PC 21 and the Requiem.

This is something I do not understand. These are great works, but they do not stick out stylistically at all. There's at least a dozen more concertos by Mozart that are every bit as great and rather similar in style. The Requiem is a different case, but there is the c minor Mass K 427. And lots of his music in symphonies, opera, chamber is also quite "serious".

Rodrigo's Guitar Concerto
Tchaikovsky Variations on a Rococo Theme (although I love his Pathetique Symphony)

I heartily dislike both of these (although I am o.k. with several other things by Tchaikovsky, Rodrigo seems 3rd rate kitsch, I am not going to bother with this stuff)

[Ken B]

I think I might have the thread winner:

Beethoven, Symphony #5

I have been noticing in the past couple of years a nascent dislike of this piece. Very odd, and a bit disturbing, but true none the less.